Fernandez v. Schultz

In this case arising out of the sale of a private home, we address the issue of whether a thorough inspection by the buyers will always relieve the seller of liability for alleged misrepresentations about the homes condition. J. A. "Pepe" Fernandez contends there is no evidence to support the trial courts finding that he knowingly misrepresented the condition of the home he sold to Gavin and Cynthia Schultz. In the alternative, Fernandez contends the Schultzes reliance on a professional inspection report after his alleged misrepresentations was a new and independent basis for the purchase, which intervened and superseded any misrepresentations he may have made. Fernandez also argues that the Schultzes failed to mitigate their losses and, therefore, the trial courts award of damages was excessive. We conclude there is some evidence that Fernandez knowingly misrepresented the condition of the house. We also conclude that an independent inspection does not always supersede a sellers misrepresentations as a producing cause of damages to the buyer. Rather, as here, the sellers misrepresentations may be one of several producing causes of the damages suffered. Finally, we conclude the trial court did not err in making its award of damages. We affirm the trial courts judgment in favor of the Schultzes.