Case Law Summaries

Langan v. Milyadis

CONTRACTS; PAROL EVIDENCE—The parol evidence rule does not preclude consideration of matters that can aid in interpretation of an agreement or that can give meaning to its terms.

• Opinion Date: February 21, 2001
• Real Property Law

Gross v. Lasko

CONTRACTS; NOTICE—Where a mortgage contingency clause has no specific provision requiring notice to the seller of its buyer’s election to waive the contingency, any reasonable notice, written or oral, will be sufficient.

• Opinion Date: March 30, 2001
• Real Property Law

Sharpe v. Gateway Funding Diversified Mortgage Services

CONTRACTS; INSPECTIONS—It is generally unreasonable for a home buyer to rely on a lender’s inspection, loan approval, or appraisal in lieu of obtaining an independent home inspection.

• Opinion Date: November 8, 2001
• Real Property Law

Mercer v. Corporate Property Investors

CONTRACTS; INDEMNIFICATION—An indemnification obligation “relating to, arising out of or existing by reason of” performance or breach of a contract does not limit an indemnifying party to only its own negligence.

• Opinion Date: April 6, 2001
• Real Property Law

D’Ottavi v. Carrafa

CONTRACTS; FRAUD—A remote seller’s misrepresentation, even by silence, can give rise to a claim from an ultimate buyer, not in privity, if it was foreseeable that the remote buyer would have a reason to rely on the statement, and such a buyer did reasonably rely on the statement.

• Opinion Date: November 29, 2001
• Real Property Law

McGoey v. Rogers

CONTRACTS; DAMAGES—Repairing of building defects by a new property owner before its seller or inspector has an opportunity to examine the alleged problems can bar the new owner from collecting damages from them unless other evidence of the damage, such as photographs, would enable the other party to defend the lawsuit.

• Opinion Date: October 23, 2001
• Real Property Law

Ingrassia Construction Company, Inc. v. Vernon Township Board of Education

CONTRACTS; CONTRACTORS—Even though a construction contract calls for an architect’s certificate of default before an owner can terminate it for cause, an owner lacking such a certificate may still pursue common law claims for breach of contract.

• Opinion Date: November 8, 2001
• Real Property Law

Macalalad v. Castle Ridge at Newton, Inc.

CONTRACTS; CONTINGENCIES—Where performance of a contract is contingent upon a buyer’s ability to obtain financing, without greater elaboration, the buyer may terminate the contract if its mortgage commitment requires proof of the sale of an existing residence and no sale takes place.

• Opinion Date: October 31, 2001
• Real Property Law

Peterson v. Estate of Pursell

CONTRACTS; BROKERS—A real estate broker is not an agent of the seller for the purpose of determining when a executed contract is delivered to the seller for the purpose of beginning the three-day attorney review period.

• Opinion Date: April 10, 2001
• Real Property Law

Melcer v. Tyrpak

CONTRACTS—Where parties reach agreement on what they understand to be a binding, enforceable contract, the making of minor changes of a non-critical nature by the last party to sign, without objection by the other party, does not invalidate the contract.

• Opinion Date: May 17, 2001
• Real Property Law