Pagano v. Krohn: Buyer’s Representative Did Not Have Duty to Tell Buyers That Lawsuit Might Affect Value
Raymond and Lillian Pagano, who were represented by Jim Lawson (the "Buyer’s Representative") made an offer to purchase a condominium unit in
the Black Horse Ranch, California, which was owned by Helga Krohn and listed for sale with Peggy Chodorow (the "Listing Broker"). Krohn
completed a real estate disclosure statement, stating that she was unaware of any flooding, drainage or grading problems. The Listing
Jennings v. Smith: Vice President of Home Building Company May Be Personally Liable for Negligent Construction and Fraudulent Concealment
This Georgia case involved the purchase of a new home from Roswell Properties by Maneola Jennings. After closing, Jennings claimed she discovered a variety of structural defects in the house, including a cracked driveway, leaks and soil erosion near a retaining wall. She also claimed there was serious settling of the property, including cracked and shifted walls and floors and a defective deck.
Schooley v. Mannion: The Fact That Property Was Sold "As- is" Did Not Prevent a Lawsuit Based on Fraud in the Inducement
In a recent New York case, Schooley Associates bought a nine-unit apartment building (the "Property") from Circular Street Associates "CSA").
Vaughan Enterprises v. Quincy Ass'n of REALTORS®: REALTOR® Association Did Not Violate Antitrust Laws
The Quincy Association of REALTORS® (the "Association") operates a multiple listing service (the "MLS"). The MLS’s rules contain the usual requirement that the amount of compensation to be paid to a cooperating broker must be published in the MLS, expressed either as a percentage of the gross selling price of the property or a flat dollar amount.
A 1997 case from the Court of Appeals of Texas examined whether a broker earned a commission for producing a "ready, willing and able" buyer. Blackstone v. Thalman. In this case, Terry Blackstone listed his home for sale for $750,000 with real estate broker Nancy Thalman. Thalman found a potential purchaser for the home, Carl Lewis, who offered $550,00 cash, and wanted possession 48 hours after closing. Blackstone did not accept the offer.
Insurance Co. of Illinois v. Stringfield: Lead-Based Paint - Insurance Pollution Exclusion Does Not Prevent Coverage
For two years, a young child, Lawrence Willis, and his mother Gloria lived in a Chicago apartment owned by Katalina Stringfield (the "Owner"). The Insurance Company of Illinois ("ICI") sold the Owner a general liability insurance policy covering the property. Gloria Willis filed a lawsuit alleging that Lawrence suffered lead poisoning because he had consumed lead-based paint and plaster which had separated from various exposed surfaces of the property.
Salute v. Stratford Greens Garden Apartments: Landlord May Refuse to Rent to Disabled Section 8 Tenants - Not Violation of U.S. Housing Act or Fair Housing Act
This case involves two disabled individuals who receive Section 8 housing assistance from the federal government. Salute v. Stratford Greens Garden Apartments. Under the Section 8 program, the tenant pays rent of up to 30% of his income and the government contracts with the private landlord to pay the rest of the market rent. Participation in the Section 8 program is voluntary on the landlord’s part and a landlord lawfully may refuse to accept rental applications from Section 8 tenants.
In Thomas v. Daubs, the Appellate Court of Illinois affirmed a lower court decision holding that business brokers involved in the sale of a landfill were not entitled to a finder’s fee since they were not licensed to engage in the real estate business.
A 1997 Appellate Court of Illinois decision held that a release contained in a Cancellation Agreement for Contract to Purchase Real Estate was unenforceable due to lack of consideration. Johnson v. Maki and Associates, Inc. In this case, Jeanne Johnson listed a house for sale with Maki & Associates, Inc. Johnson entered into a real estate contract (the "Contract") with a couple (the "Buyers") to sell the house, and Maki placed the Buyers’ $2,000 earnest money deposit in an escrow account.
In McCready v. Hoffius, et al., the Court of Appeals of Michigan held that a landlord who refuses to rent to unmarried persons does not violate the Michigan Civil Rights Act (the "MCRA") because unmarried cohabitation is not protected by that law. John and Terry Hoffius, a married couple (the "Landlords"), own residential rental property in Jackson, Michigan. In response to the Landlords’ advertisement, two unmarried couples inquired about renting the property.