Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Under New York law, the doctrine of caveat emptor, or buyer beware, applies to the purchase and sale of real property. Stambovsky v. Ackley, 169 AD2d 254, 257. Under this doctrine, which has undergone some recent modifications, the seller of real property is under no duty to speak (ie, make certain disclosures to the purchaser) concerning the condition of the property when the parties deal at arms' length. Id. Mere silence on the part of the seller concerning a defective or otherwise undesirable condition of the property, without some act or conduct that deceived the purchaser, does not amount to conduct that is actionable as a fraud. London v. Courduff, 141 AD2d 803, 804.
According to doctrine of caveat emptor, as applied by New York courts, the purchaser of real property has a duty to inspect the property and satisfy himself as to his bargain. Glazer v. LoPreste, 278 AD2d 198, 198-99. Where a purchaser has the means available to him for discovering, by the exercise of ordinary intelligence and diligence, the true nature of the transaction into which he is about to enter, he must make use of those means, absent which he will be precluded from arguing that he was fraudulently induced to enter into the transaction. Ittleson v. Lombardi, 193 AD2 374, 376. Indeed, New York courts have dismissed fraud claims asserted by purchasers where preexisting conditions were reasonably discoverable by inspection. These circumstances included underground contamination (Venezia v. Coldwell Banker Sammis Realty, 270 AD2d 480; Vandevort v. Higginbotham, 222 AD2d 831), prior use of a vacant lot as a landfill (London v. Courduff, supra), and a vintage cooperative apartment in a “dreadful state of disrepair.” (Ittleson v. Lombardi, supra). The common thread in these cases is the court's finding that the seller had no duty to disclose the pre-existing condition and, in fact, had not taken any action to prevent the purchaser from discovering the condition through the exercise of due diligence.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The real property transfer tax does not apply to all leases, and understanding the tax rules of the applicable jurisdiction can allow parties to plan ahead to avoid unnecessary tax liability.