Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

These things are factually intensive. Generally, if there has been a misrepresentation of fact, those cases tend to fall under "fraud." The statute of limitations for fraud is three (3) years. The statute begins running when the buyer knew or should have reasonably known about the fraud.

As I mentioned, this is dependent on the underlying facts. If it is a dispute over title, questions arise as to whether you would have had constructive notice of defects, either from obtaining a policy of title insurance, or performing a title search yourself. For example, if a notice of pendency of action was recorded (commonly called a lis pendens), prior to your purchase of the property, and you did not check the status of record title, the law will hold that you were on constructive notice at the time of the purchase, and not later when you were sued.

I suggest you speak to an attorney familiar with real estate sooner, rather than later.

I agree with Mr. Roach's analysis, and there is one other timing consideration you need to take into account: If you have been sued for something where the "realtor" shares some or all of the blame or fault, then it may be appropriate for you to file and serve a cross-complaint at the time you file and serve your answer to the suit against you. If this is the situation, you need also to consider the 30-day period within which an answer or other responsive pleading should be filed. It's possible to cross-complain later on, but you'd need to apply for and receive a judge's OK.