provided the Roberts' contact information to DBSI. After connecting DBSI and the Roberts,
Donnerstag played no role in the Roberts' DBSI North Stafford investment. Robert Roberts
acknowledged that Donnerstag did not identify DBSI North Stafford as a potential investment,
nor did he encourage the -Roberts to invest in it. In fact, Robert Roberts explained that he did not
6
Additional factors unrelated to Donnerstag contributed to the Roberts' DBSI investment.
Before investing in DBSI North Stafford, the Roberts had to qualify as accredited investors and
receive lender -approval, both of which occurred without Donnerstag's assistance or knowledge.
The Roberts conducted due diligence on DBSI North Stafford and signed a due diligence
completion acknowledgment, again, without Donnerstag's involvement. The Roberts consulted
legal counsel about the investment. Robert Roberts even conceded that were it not for Rottman's
involvement in providing information about potential investments, Michelle Brock's providing
documents to finalize the transaction, and Aria Asset Management's involvement, the Roberts
would not have invested in DBSI North Stafford. Finally, tax law, not Donnerstag, dictated the
26
Roberts' deadline for purchasing a replacement property to satisfy their 1031 exchange.
U.
C.
S. 1031.
§
10
No. 43018 5
- II
-
even consider Donnerstag to be a seller of DBSI North Stafford. Accordingly, the second
Haberman factor also demonstrates that Donnerstag's conduct was not a substantial contributing
factor to the sale. See Haberman, 109 Wn.2d at 131 3
- 2.
Third, we . consider how much time elapsed between Donnerstag's referral, his last