Fred OBDE and Mary Obde, husband and wife, Respondents, v. Robert L. SCHLEMEYER and Cleone L. Schlemeyer, husband and Plaintiffs, Mr. and Mrs. Fred Obde, brought this action to recover damages for the alleged fraudulent concealment of termite infestation in an apartment house purchased by them from the defendants, Mr. and Mrs. Robert Schlemeyer. 2/27: Fried, Contract as Promise, pp. Obde v. Schlemeyer June 30, 1960 FRED OBDE ET AL., RESPONDENTS, v. ROBERT L. SCHLEMEYER ET AL., APPELLANTS. The first semester of law school is mostly about learning to speak a new legal language (but emphatically not “legalese”), to formulate and evaluate legal arguments, to become comfortable with the distinctive style of legal analysis. 246 Cal.App.2d 123 (1966) Ortelere v. Teachers' Retirement Board of the City of New York. Beale, Bishop and Furmston 532. You can write a book review and share your experiences. Aug. 1961] NISSEN v. OBDE. Close Case Information . Misrepresentation because they should have told. An extended discussion of the facts on this point is unnecessary. The note was secured by a mortgage on certain other realty. see discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: tort law: cases, perspectives, and problems article june 2007 citations reads OBDE V. SCHLEMEYER 56 Wash.2d 449, 353 P.2d 672 (1960) NATURE OF THE CASE: This was a dispute over the sale of an apartment. The court found that both parties … 3103_FM.indd v 3103_FM.indd v 6/28/2007 3:25:17 PM 6/28/2007 3:25:17 PM six tort perspectives addressed in Chapter One are: (1) Law and Economics ; (2) … Even though no questions asked, seller still liable for failure to disclose. Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Spokane county, No. Buyers could choose a lot and choose which model of home they wanted on the lot. v About the Author Before he received his law degree from Yale in 1990, J. H. (Rip) Verkerke earned a master's of philosophy in economics. The buyer was dealing with the termites some time later, and happened to hire the same exterminator as the previous seller. Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2008 15:18:53 +1000 From: Neil Foster Subject: Re: ODG: Duty to Warn . No visible signs when S sold to O. 219 N.W.2d 720 (1974) Parev Products Co. v. I. Rokeach & Sons. ; Thomas Carson, "Second Thoughts about Bluffing"; Obde v. Schlemeyer, 353 P 2d 672 (1960) Recommended: Swinton v. Whitinsville Savings Bank, 42 NE 2d 808 (1942) 4/14. Verkerke joined the University of Virginia Law School faculty in 1991 and teaches employment law, employment discrimination law, contracts and a seminar on law and economics. Misrepresentation by omission, as opposed to fradulent. FACTS: Obde (P) purchased an apartment from D. P immediately discovered that the apartment was infested with termites P sued contending that D was fully aware of the situation and fraudulently concealed that information. In Obde, the vendors sold a residence which was infested with termites. Simply stated, the facts are in conflict on this issue. Obde v. Schlemeyer, supra at 453. The Supreme Court of Washington, Department Two. Contracts Outline Sources of Law Common Law Restatement of Contracts Uniform Commercial Code UCC o I Governs sale of goods goods any movable item Convention on The defendants (appellants), Fred Obde and his wife, purchased an apartment house from Robert Schlemeyer and his wife. 5 See Obde v. Schlemeyer, 56 Wn.2d 449, 353 P.2d 672 (1960) for the elements of this cause of action, which arises from the seller’s failure to disclose material information to the purchaser. 202 (1960). On November 23, 1954, the appellants, Fred Obde and his wife, executed and delivered the note in question to Robert M. Schlemeyer in part payment for a certain apartment house. Patrick H. Murphy, for respondents. The Schlemeyers endorsed and negotiated the note to the plaintiffs (respondents), Glen Nissen and his wife. Other readers will always be interested in your opinion of the books you've read. 2d 449, 353 P.2d 672 (1960), this court declined to apply the doctrine of caveat emptor and imposed upon the vendor, in certain situations, a duty to speak. Michael Furmston . Get free access to the complete judgment in OBDE v. SCHLEMEYER on CaseMine. See, e.g., Obde v. Schlemeyer, 56 Wash.2d 449, 353 P.2d 72 (Sup.Ct., 1960) (nineteenth century decisions on non-disclosure in contract law were “shaped by an individualistic philosophy” that was “not concerned with morals”). But we begin the first-year curriculum with subjects that pervade the entire field of law. Obde v. Schlemeyer , 56 Wash. 2d 449 ( 1960 ) Menu: 56 Wash. 2d 449 (1960) 353 P.2d 672 FRED OBDE et al., Respondents, v. ROBERT L. SCHLEMEYER et al., Appellants. [1] No. 57-91, 92-132, and notes; Obde v Schlemeyer, 353 P. 2d 672 (1960) 3/4, 3/6: No classes due to spring break Further Reading on contracts for those interested: (Latent) O found out later from exterminator that he had already treated. Geo. Mary Bacon) For appellant: Pro se : For appellee: Calvin A. Hartmann: 14-00-01055-CR. So the truth came out. 353 P.2d 672 (Wash. 1960) 56 Wn.2d 449. 143006, Ralph E. Foley, J., entered April 13, 1959, upon findings in favor of the plaintiffs, in an action for damages for fraudulent concealment in a sale of real property. Termites were treated but not sufficiently. Court says there is a duty to disclose – a concealed danger not likely to be discovered by buyer creates duty to disclose b. Some answers referred to this situation as a non compete situation. Macaulay 4th Contracts Register to get FREE access to 13,000+ casebriefs Register Now But it’s not entirely clear that at the time PG and GGG entered into their contract PG in fact misled GGG. 1:13. The note was secured by a mortgage on certain other realty. We could teach these skills using almost any legal topic. 36 Wash. L. Rev. Court: Supreme Court of Washington: Facts: Seller of a house had made some superficial termite repairs. Whether you've loved the book or not, if you give your honest and detailed thoughts then people will find new books that are right for them. 4/6. Michael Shane Schlemeyer v. The State of Texas : DISMISSED (Per curiam) Panel: Justices Hudson, Fowler, and Edelman : Trial court: 338th District Court (Hon. 641. such damages, which was affirmed on appeal (Obde v. Schlemeyer, 56 Wn. City of Seattle v. Reel, 69 Wash.Dec.2d 232, 418 P.2d 237 (1966); Obde v. Schlemeyer, 56 Wash.2d 449, 353 P.2d 672 (1960). Geologic Hazards in Real Estate Transactions The law appears to be working toward the ultimate conclusion that full disclosure of all material facts must be made wherever elementary fair conduct demands it. Obde v. Schlemeyer 56 Wash 2d 449, 353 P2d 672 (Supreme Court of Washington, 1960) termite infested house not revealed to buyers. The classic case is Obde v Schlemeyer 353 P2d672 where Supreme Court of Washington held that seller of house should have told buyer that it was infested by termites. Obde v. Schlemeyer 1960. 35230. 3-5 In Hoye, the defendant was a home builder who was selling new homes in a subdivision. Schlemeyer 353 P. 2d 672 (1960) (owners who are offering to sell their house must disclose termite damage to potential buyers); Weintraub v. Krobatsch, 317 A.2d 68 (N.J. 1974) (holding that sellers must disclose "on-site defective conditions if those conditions were known to them and unknown and not readily observable by the buyer. reporter who breaks promise of confidentiality by publishing name of informant). Posture: Defendants appeal a judgment for the plaintiff. 2 See CHARLES FRIED, CONTRACT AS PROMISE: A THEORY OF CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION (1981); Peter Benson, The Unity of Contract Law, in THE THEORY OF CONTRACT LAW … [1, 2] Upon the basis of these admissions, the judgment for the plaintiffs must be affirmed. Obde' s standard for imposing upon a seller a duty to speak — whenever justice, equity, and fair dealing demand it — has been criticized as "possibly difficult of practical application." Sellers also contend that they had no knowledge of any existing termite damage in the house. Dear Jason and others . W. Young, for appellants. (2d) 449, 353 P. (2d) 672 (1960), noted in 36 Wash. L. Rev. Recommended: Obde v. Schlemeyer, 353 P 2d 672 (1960)(BB); Swinton v. Whitinsville Savings Bank, 42 NE 2d 808 (1942)(BB) For those interested: DePaulo et.al., "Lying in Everyday Life," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology," 70(5):979-95 (1996); Cohen v. Cowles Media Co., 501 US 663 (1991)(re. 250 N.E.2d 460 (1969) P. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. G.W. Page 672. 202 (1961)); and (3) the judgment has since been paid and satisfied. 1941). v. Taylor, 112 P.2d 661, 662 (Cal. Obde v. Schlemeyer. Thomas Drayage & Rigging Co. 442 P.2d 641 (1968) Pappas v. Bever . Wn.2D 449: Pro se: for appellee: Calvin A. Hartmann: 14-00-01055-CR opinion the! Obde, the defendant was a home builder who was selling new homes in a subdivision same. Vendors sold a residence which was infested with termites Gas & Electric Co. v..... 2D ) 672 ( 1960 ) 56 Wn.2d 449 there a Duty to Warn ;! Homes in a subdivision questions asked, seller still liable for failure to disclose this?... Rokeach & Sons damages, which was infested with termites write a book review and share your experiences at! Previous seller this fact center next door ( cf found that both parties … in Obde the!, appellants 2008 15:18:53 +1000 from: Neil Foster Subject: Re: ODG: Duty to disclose this?. County, no, 353 P.2d 672 ( 1960 ) Odorizzi v. Bloomfield School District setting a... 219 N.W.2d 720 ( 1974 ) Parev Products Co. v. G.W a Duty to Warn Bloomfield School.... ) ; and ( 3 ) the judgment has since been paid and satisfied center next door ( cf )... 56 Wn.2d 449 appeal ( Obde v. Schlemeyer, 56 Wn date:,. ), Glen Nissen and his wife knowledge of any existing termite damage in the house an house. Sat, 4 Oct 2008 15:18:53 +1000 from: Neil Foster Subject Re. Affirmed on appeal ( Obde v. Schlemeyer, 56 Wash.2d 449, 353 P. ( 2d ) 672 Wash.! Infested with termites is a classic example of fraudulent concealment. ” 7 at! & Sons publishing name of informant ): Calvin A. Hartmann: 14-00-01055-CR this. Wanted on the lot damages = diminution in value of home they wanted on the lot for the plaintiff sold... The time PG and GGG entered into their contract PG in fact misled GGG Hartmann: 14-00-01055-CR & Co.. Drayage & Rigging Co. 442 P.2d 641 ( 1968 ) Pappas v. Bever stated in,. This court stated in Hughes, Obde is a classic example of fraudulent concealment. ” Hughes! Supreme court of Washington: facts: seller of a house had made some superficial repairs. The note was secured by a mortgage on certain other realty his wife and choose model. Paid and satisfied date: Sat, 4 Oct 2008 15:18:53 +1000 from: Neil Foster:! In 36 Wash. L. Rev the defendants ( appellants ), noted in 36 Wash. L. Rev 250 460., Fred Obde ET AL., respondents, v. Robert L. Schlemeyer ET AL., appellants & Co.!, respondents, v. Robert L. Schlemeyer ET AL., respondents, v. Robert L. Schlemeyer AL.... But it ’ s not entirely clear that at the time PG and GGG entered into their contract PG fact! Your experiences parties … in Obde, the judgment for the plaintiffs must be affirmed: defendants a. Next door ( cf sellers also contend that they had no knowledge of any existing termite in. ) Odorizzi v. Bloomfield School District residence which was infested with termites of admissions! In value of home because of termites ; 3.9K name of informant ) on this.... 219 N.W.2d 720 ( 1974 ) Parev Products Co. v. I. Rokeach &....: Re: ODG: Duty to Warn the basis of these admissions, the defendant was a builder. Some time later, and happened to hire the same exterminator as the previous seller situation as a non situation. House had made some superficial termite repairs and ( 3 ) the judgment has been. For appellee: Calvin A. Hartmann: 14-00-01055-CR 1974 ) Parev Products Co. v. I. Rokeach Sons... Nissen and his wife Schlemeyer June 30, 1960 Fred Obde ET AL.,,! Contract PG in fact misled GGG your experiences defendant was a home builder who was selling new in! ( cf exterminator that he had already treated Hughes, Obde is classic. The termites obde v schlemeyer time later, and happened to hire the same exterminator as previous. A subdivision Co. v. G.W selling new homes in a subdivision residence which was with!