CUSHMAN V. KIRBY 536 A.2d 550 (1987) CASE BRIEF

CUSHMAN V. KIRBY

536 A.2d 550 (1987)

NATURE OF THE CASE: This was a misrepresentation suit over the sale of a home. Kirby (D), sellers, appealed from a judgment on a jury verdict in favor of Cushman (P), buyers, in a lawsuit for misrepresentation.

FACTS: Cushman (P) bought a home from Kirby (D). Before buying they viewed the premises on two occasions. Two months after the sale P sued for misrepresentation in that D, during negotiations, had represented that there was good quality water available on the land suitable for household uses when in fact the water was not good quality. When they bought the home and inquired about the water conditioner in the basement, D (Mrs. Kirby spoke and Mr. Kirby though there remained silent) stated that the water was fine and a little hard; P then assumed that the problem only involved hard water. When P moved into the house the water smelled from sulfur and when contacted D stated that she forgot to tell P that when the water smells like rotten eggs the conditioner needs Clorox. P added Clorox and the water then tasted like sulfur and bleach. P contacted a plumber and then found that they had sulfur water and that sulfur water is not hard water and that there was no complete solution to the problem of sulfur water. A hookup to the city water supply cost $5,000 plus annual water bills. P got the trial verdict for $6,600. D appealed.

ISSUE:

RULE OF LAW:

HOLDING AND DECISION:

LEGAL ANALYSIS:

Get free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online

for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.

https://bsmsphd.com

© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner