Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
28. How should the court rule?
There are no applicable statutes.
The man had purchased the house for investment purposes, intending to rent it out while continuing to live next door. After the sale, the man started to renovate the house and discovered serious termite damage. The man sued the woman for breach of contract.
A woman inherited a house from a distant relative. The woman had never visited the house, which was located in another state, and did not want to own it. Upon learning this, a man who lived next door to the house called the woman and asked to buy the house. The woman agreed, provided that the house was sold «as is.» The man agreed, and the woman conveyed the house to the man by a warranty deed.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
A is incorrect. The man's proposed change of use was not known to the woman, nor was it stated in the contract. His planned change to the use of the house is irrelevant to the outcome of the case. The woman should prevail, but it is because she sold the house «as is.»
C is incorrect. The doctrine of caveat emptor states that the buyer accepts the property in its current condition. Therefore, the caveat emptor doctrine would not protect the man as the buyer. In fact, a seller may disclaim any duty to disclose defects if the disclaimer is sufficiently clear and specific. In this case, the contract specifically noted that the house was being sold «as is,» and therefore the woman should prevail.
D is incorrect. A warranty deed provides remedies for breaches of title matters. Termite damage affects the physical quality of the property, not title to the property. A seller may disclaim any duty to disclose physical defects if the disclaimer is sufficiently clear and specific. In this case, the contract specifically noted that the house was being sold «as is,» and therefore the woman should prevail.