Next, the court looked at the Buyers»
negligent misrepresentation allegations against the Buyer's Representative over her recommendation of the Inspector.
The court first considered
the negligent misrepresentation allegations.
However, the court found that the Buyer's breach of fiduciary duty and
negligent misrepresentation allegations against the Buyer's Representative should have been considered by a jury, and so sent those allegations back to the jury.
The court found that the doctrine can be used in all negligence actions, including
negligent misrepresentation allegations such as the Buyers made here.
A third party can bring
negligent misrepresentation allegations against professional individuals or entities who provide false information due to lack of competence or failure to exercise proper care in preparing information which is relied upon by a third party and such reliance is foreseeable to the professional.
Thus, the court reversed
the negligent misrepresentation allegations against the Inspector and sent these allegations back to the trial court for further proceedings.
The broker had filed a motion to have
the negligent misrepresentation allegations against it dismissed, but the U.S. District Court determined that under Illinois law, a party may allege negligent misrepresentation if another individual owed it a legal duty, that duty was breached, and damages arose from that breach.
The law provides that a third party can bring
negligent misrepresentation allegations against professional individuals or entities that provide false information due to lack of competence or failure to exercise proper care in preparing information that a third party is foreseeably reliant upon.
However, the court found that the Smileys could bring
negligent misrepresentation allegations against the inspector and so reversed the trial court on these allegations.
Not exact matches
In addition, Mr. Morley filed a subsequent lawsuit containing
allegations that the formation of Square and the development of our card reader and decoding technologies constituted, among other things, breach of an alleged oral joint venture, fraud,
negligent misrepresentation, civil conspiracy, unjust enrichment, and misappropriation of trade secrets, as well as other related claims.
Representation of real estate developers in arbitrations involving
allegations of fraud and
negligent misrepresentation, and involving claims of rescission.
His suit included
allegations of breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and
negligent misrepresentation.
The Buyer brought a lawsuit against the Developer, claiming that the Developer misrepresented the Neighbor's disruptive behavior and alleged
negligent misrepresentation, consumer fraud
allegations, and
negligent infliction of emotional distress.
In Hagans v. Woodruff, the Court of Appeals of Texas addressed a buyer's
allegations of
negligent misrepresentation and violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practice Act (DPTA) against a broker.
In Mahler v. Keenan Real Estate, Inc., the Supreme Court of Kansas addressed
allegations of fraudulent and
negligent misrepresentation by a buyer against a vendor and a brokerage firm.
Therefore, the court sent the
negligent misrepresentation and breach of fiduciary duty
allegations against the Buyer's Representative back to the trial court for consideration by a jury.
He filed a lawsuit against the former owner, the Listing Broker, and the Buyer's Representative alleging fraud and
negligent misrepresentation against all the parties, and breach of fiduciary duty
allegations against the Buyer's Representative.
In a case previously summarized in The Letter of the Law, a federal court has considered whether a buyer's
allegations could proceed against a listing broker for
negligent misrepresentation when the listing broker failed to disclose the presence of lead paint on the property.