 |
Wiki Law School will soon be moving! Please update your bookmarks. Our future address is www.wikilawschool.org |
Johnson v. Davis: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
Davis wins in the trial court & the court of appeals in Florida. | Davis wins in the trial court & the court of appeals in Florida. | ||
|issues=Does the seller of a house have a duty to disclose facts that materially affect the value of the house, are not readily observable, & are not known to the buyer? | |||
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | |case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | ||
|link=https://law.justia.com/cases/florida/supreme-court/1985/65330-0.html | |link=https://law.justia.com/cases/florida/supreme-court/1985/65330-0.html | ||
Revision as of 19:07, April 19, 2023
| Johnson v. Davis | |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
|---|---|
| Citation | |
| Date decided | October 31, 1985 |
Facts
Johnson (defendant) agreed to sell his house to the Davises (plaintiffs).
The home sales contract stipulated a $5,000 initial deposit & a $26,000 2nd deposit (in the 1980s money).
The buyers Davises had the right to inspect the roof. Before closing, the buyers noticed peeling plaster in the house.
After closing, the buyers (Davis) found the house needed a new roof for $15,000.Procedural History
Davis sued the seller Johnson for rescission of the real estate contract.
Davis wins in the trial court & the court of appeals in Florida.Issues
Does the seller of a house have a duty to disclose facts that materially affect the value of the house, are not readily observable, & are not known to the buyer?
