Salinas v. Skelton

Fair Side Lofts, L.L.C. Fair Side was formed in 1994 for the purpose of converting an old warehouse into residential condominium units. Richard Skelton was Fair Side’s managing member, and Ronald Creel was Fair Side’s only other member. The company that financed the conversion required Skelton and Creel to individually purchase a certain number of condominium units as a condition for loan approval. One of those units was unit 13. Cynthia Salinas purchased unit 13 from Skelton and Creel. After partially knocking out one of the walls in her unit to reveal an old boiler, Salinas discovered that the boiler was insulated with asbestos. Salinas sued Skelton, Creel, Fair Side and their real estate agent, alleging that they knew of the asbestos, yet failed to disclose this knowledge to her. Salinas alleged causes of action against Skelton, Creel and Fair Side for breach of contract, fraud, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and punitive damages. Salinas alleged causes of action against the real estate agent, John A. Silliman and Remax North Atlanta, Inc. Remax for negligent misrepresentation, intentional infliction of emotional distress and punitive damages. The trial court granted summary judgment to all the defendants,and Salinas appealed.1 For reasons which follow, we affirm in part and reverse in part.

On appeal, we review the trial court’s grant of summary judgment de novo to determine whether the evidence of record, viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, demonstrates any genuine issue of material fact.2 Summary judgment is proper only when there is no genuine issue of material fact, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.3