Disclose, Disclose, Disclose
Sellers relying on the doctrine of "caveat emptor" could easily find themselves in for a rude awakening.
May 27, 2015 at 12:23 PM
7 minute read
Sellers relying on the doctrine of “caveat emptor” could easily find themselves in for a rude awakening. Beginning in the mid-twentieth century and continuing through the present day, New Jersey courts have steadily moved away from caveat emptor and toward mandatory disclosure of latent items (i.e., items which are not readily observable by purchasers conducting inspections), with buyers permitted to raise post-closing claims based on the nondisclosure. In two recent decisions, New Jersey courts have held that sellers have a duty to disclose “latent” defects to a buyer regardless of any “as is” language in the sale agreement.
Dalmazio v. Rosa, 2015 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 326 (App. Div. Feb. 20, 2015).
In Dalmazio, the Appellate Division overturned the Law Division's grant of summary judgment on a home purchaser's common-law fraud claims. The defendant, a contractor, purchased a home with the intent of demolishing it and building a new home for his personal use. Upon realizing that a demolition and rebuilding was not feasible, he decided to renovate the house instead (which renovations included extensive foundation work). While the renovations were underway, the plaintiff inquired about purchasing the property, expressing a desire to purchase the property in its current condition, with the interior being completely unfinished except for the wall studs.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllWe Applaud NJ Supreme Court's Balanced Rules for Reinstatement of Disbarred Attorneys
4 minute readOn the Move and After Hours: Connell Foley; Lindabury; Day Pitney; Archer
7 minute readNJ Supreme Court Steps In to Dismiss Controversial Ethics Complaint Against Mercer County Presiding Judge
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1The Law Firm Disrupted: Playing the Talent Game to Win
- 2A&O Shearman Adopts 3-Level Lockstep Pay Model Amid Shift to All-Equity Partnership
- 3Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 4BD Settles Thousands of Bard Hernia Mesh Lawsuits
- 5A RICO Surge Is Underway: Here's How the Allstate Push Might Play Out
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250