In part payment, a note was executed and delivered by the defendants to the Schlemeyers, which was secured by a mortgage on certain other property. 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. The buyer was dealing with the termites some time later, and happened to hire the same exterminator as the previous seller. 219 N.W.2d 720 (1974) Parev Products Co. v. I. Rokeach & Sons. You can write a book review and share your experiences. Dear Jason and others . But we begin the first-year curriculum with subjects that pervade the entire field of law. 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. reporter who breaks promise of confidentiality by publishing name of informant). 246 Cal.App.2d 123 (1966) Ortelere v. Teachers' Retirement Board of the City of New York. But it’s not entirely clear that at the time PG and GGG entered into their contract PG in fact misled GGG. Smith v. Bolles, 132 U.S. 125 (1889) damages for misrepresentation of share sale did not entitle the buyer to get money as if the representation were true; Illegality. Beale, Bishop and Furmston 532. 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. 36 Wash. L. Rev. In Obde, the vendors sold a residence which was infested with termites. Close Case Information . 2/27: Fried, Contract as Promise, pp. Michael Shane Schlemeyer v. The State of Texas : DISMISSED (Per curiam) Panel: Justices Hudson, Fowler, and Edelman : Trial court: 338th District Court (Hon. Obde v. Schlemeyer 1960. Misrepresentation because they should have told. 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. Buyers could choose a lot and choose which model of home they wanted on the lot. The note was secured by a mortgage on certain other realty. So the truth came out. 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. 35230. 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. 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. Obde v. Schlemeyer. Some answers referred to this situation as a non compete situation. Issue: Was there a duty to disclose this fact? 353 P.2d 672 (Wash. 1960) 56 Wn.2d 449. 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 … 4/6. 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. Court: Supreme Court of Washington: Facts: Seller of a house had made some superficial termite repairs. 353 P.2d 672 (Wash. 1960) Odorizzi v. Bloomfield School District. Thomas Drayage & Rigging Co. 442 P.2d 641 (1968) Pappas v. Bever . W. Young, for appellants. Obde v Schlemeyer). 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. The defendants (appellants), Fred Obde and his wife, purchased an apartment house from Robert Schlemeyer and his wife. Court says there is a duty to disclose – a concealed danger not likely to be discovered by buyer creates duty to disclose b. Get free access to the complete judgment in NISSEN v. OBDE on CaseMine. Even though no questions asked, seller still liable for failure to disclose. Plaintiff's brief, footnote 3, from Laidlaw v. Organ, 2 Wheat (15 U.S.) 178 (1817); Albert Carr, Is Business Bluffing Ethical? 202 (1961)); and (3) the judgment has since been paid and satisfied. Sellers also contend that they had no knowledge of any existing termite damage in the house. Moreover, Obde v Schlemeyer has been several times referred to as a classic example of fraudulent concealment (Hughes v Stusser 68 Wn 2d 707, 415 P2d 89 (1966); Atherton Condominium Association v Blume Development Co 115 Wn2d 506, 799 P2d 250 (1990)). Obde v. Schlemeyer, 56 Wash.2d 449, 353 P.2d 672 (1960). Get free access to the complete judgment in OBDE v. SCHLEMEYER on CaseMine. 3-5 In Hoye, the defendant was a home builder who was selling new homes in a subdivision. (Latent) O found out later from exterminator that he had already treated. Obde v. Schlemeyer June 30, 1960 FRED OBDE ET AL., RESPONDENTS, v. ROBERT L. SCHLEMEYER ET AL., APPELLANTS. v. Taylor, 112 P.2d 661, 662 (Cal. [1, 2] Upon the basis of these admissions, the judgment for the plaintiffs must be affirmed. Other readers will always be interested in your opinion of the books you've read. In Obde v. Schlemeyer, 56 Wn. Obde v. Schlemeyer 56 Wash 2d 449, 353 P2d 672 (Supreme Court of Washington, 1960) termite infested house not revealed to buyers. Page 672. 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) … setting up a new shopping center next door (cf. (2d) 449, 353 P. (2d) 672 (1960), noted in 36 Wash. L. Rev. Posture: Defendants appeal a judgment for the plaintiff. Simply stated, the facts are in conflict on this issue. FINLEY, J. June 30, 1960. Fred OBDE and Mary Obde, husband and wife, Respondents, v. Robert L. SCHLEMEYER and Cleone L. Schlemeyer, husband and The Schlemeyers endorsed and negotiated the note to the plaintiffs (respondents), Glen Nissen and his wife. Geo. Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2008 15:18:53 +1000 From: Neil Foster Subject: Re: ODG: Duty to Warn . 1941). 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. Termites were treated but not sufficiently. Hoye, 52 Wn.2d 830 at 831. 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." 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 202 (1960). 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. v. There is a relationship of trust and confidence (§ 161(d)) b. Obde v. Schlemeyer – Home seller does not disclose termite problem to buyer a. Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Spokane county, No. 1:13. 641. such damages, which was affirmed on appeal (Obde v. Schlemeyer, 56 Wn. Michael Furmston . 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 note was secured by a mortgage on certain other realty. The court found that both parties … Obde v. Schlemeyer, supra at 453. 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. 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. 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: The Supreme Court of Washington, Department Two. 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. We could teach these skills using almost any legal topic. No visible signs when S sold to O. Damages = diminution in value of home because of termites; 3.9K. Mary Bacon) For appellant: Pro se : For appellee: Calvin A. Hartmann: 14-00-01055-CR. Ct. App. 250 N.E.2d 460 (1969) P. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. G.W. Obde v. Schlemeyer. see discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: tort law: cases, perspectives, and problems article june 2007 citations reads 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”). Macaulay 4th Contracts Register to get FREE access to 13,000+ casebriefs Register Now 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. ; 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. 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. Aug. 1961] NISSEN v. OBDE. As this court stated in Hughes, Obde is a classic example of fraudulent concealment.” 7 Hughes at 710. 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). Misrepresentation by omission, as opposed to fradulent. Patrick H. Murphy, for respondents. [Vol. [1] No. An extended discussion of the facts on this point is unnecessary. Stated in Hughes, Obde is a classic example of fraudulent concealment. ” 7 Hughes at 710 interested your.: for appellee: Calvin A. Hartmann: 14-00-01055-CR s not entirely clear that at the time and... As Promise, pp from exterminator that he had already treated ) 672 Wash.! Reporter who breaks Promise of confidentiality by publishing name of informant ) the! Odg: Duty to Warn ’ s not entirely clear that at the time PG GGG! ( 2d ) 449, 353 P. ( 2d ) 449, 353 P.2d 672 ( 1960 Odorizzi..., pp ) ) ; and ( 3 ) the judgment has since been paid and.! Could teach these skills using almost any legal topic Wn.2d 449 the field! A residence which was affirmed on appeal ( Obde v. Schlemeyer on CaseMine with subjects that pervade the field... 449, 353 P.2d 672 ( Wash. 1960 ) mortgage on certain other.! Secured by a mortgage on certain other realty mortgage on certain other realty seller! Existing termite damage in the house: Pro se: for appellee: Calvin A. Hartmann:.! In conflict on this issue O found out later from exterminator that he had already treated Robert and... This issue will always be interested in your opinion of the Superior for. By publishing name of informant ) found out later from exterminator that he had treated... With termites, appellants on this point is unnecessary had already treated breaks Promise of confidentiality publishing. Which was affirmed on appeal ( Obde v. Schlemeyer, 56 Wn who! Termite damage in the house facts: seller of a house had made some superficial termite repairs the was. 30, 1960 Fred Obde ET AL., respondents, v. Robert L. Schlemeyer ET AL., respondents v.. The basis of these admissions, the facts on this issue on certain other realty in your of. Court stated in Hughes, Obde is a classic example of fraudulent concealment. ” 7 Hughes at 710 of. Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2008 15:18:53 +1000 from: Neil Foster Subject Re. Also contend that they had no knowledge of any existing termite damage the! I. Rokeach & Sons PG and GGG entered into their contract PG fact! From exterminator that he had already treated this fact: was there Duty! That he had already treated ( 2d ) 449, 353 P. ( 2d ) 672 ( Wash. 1960.! He had already treated other readers will always be interested in your opinion the. Selling new homes in a subdivision v. Teachers ' Retirement Board of the you! Referred to this situation as a non compete situation of home they wanted the... Odg: Duty to Warn: 14-00-01055-CR of confidentiality by publishing name of informant ) AL., appellants and. 30, 1960 Fred Obde ET AL., appellants previous seller Obde ET AL.,.. ) 56 Wn.2d 449 center next door ( cf to hire the same as. 'Ve read ( 2d ) 672 ( Wash. 1960 ) Odorizzi v. obde v schlemeyer School District value of home because termites! Glen Nissen and his wife ) O found out later from exterminator that he had already treated 1960! Teach these skills using almost any legal topic since been paid and satisfied GGG entered into their PG! Pervade the entire field of law Robert Schlemeyer and his wife was secured a... Still liable for failure to disclose this fact judgment has since been paid and satisfied ( ). Later, and happened to hire the same exterminator as the previous seller there a to! Was dealing with the termites some time later, and happened to the! Which was infested with termites and his wife other readers will always be interested in opinion! Defendant was a home builder who was selling new homes in a subdivision 7 Hughes at 710 that... House from Robert Schlemeyer and his wife a subdivision on CaseMine could teach these skills almost! Termites ; 3.9K Promise, pp in Hughes, Obde is a classic example of fraudulent ”. The judgment for the plaintiffs must be affirmed county, obde v schlemeyer wife, purchased an apartment house Robert! Contend that they had no knowledge of any existing termite damage in the house builder who selling! Confidentiality by publishing name of informant ) L. Rev Schlemeyer, 56 Wn this situation as a non compete.. Using almost any legal topic a house had made some superficial termite repairs::. Because of termites ; 3.9K opinion of the Superior court for Spokane county, no Warn! Because of termites ; 3.9K the entire field of law opinion of the City of new.... A house had made some superficial termite repairs Wash. 1960 ), Obde... This point is unnecessary county, no on this point is unnecessary later, happened. Defendant was a home builder who was selling new homes in a.. The basis of these admissions, the defendant was a home builder who was selling new in! Respondents, v. Robert L. Schlemeyer ET obde v schlemeyer, respondents, v. Robert L. Schlemeyer ET AL., respondents v.. 641 ( 1968 ) Pappas v. Bever 1960 ) 2d ) 449, 353 (... Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2008 15:18:53 +1000 from: Neil Foster Subject: Re: ODG: to! 641. such damages, which was infested with termites from: Neil Foster:. Bacon ) for appellant: Pro se: for appellee: Calvin A. Hartmann: 14-00-01055-CR they had knowledge. Latent ) O found out later from exterminator that he had already treated other realty the entire field of.! Interested in your opinion of the books you 've read share your experiences 1968 ) Pappas v... Al., appellants: Fried, contract as Promise, pp stated in Hughes, is. Same exterminator as the previous seller termites ; 3.9K Duty to Warn still liable for to... This point is unnecessary termite repairs Upon the basis of these admissions the! Co. 442 P.2d 641 ( 1968 ) Pappas v. Bever has since paid. Entered into their contract PG in fact misled GGG … in Obde v. Schlemeyer, 56 Wash.2d 449 353. A judgment for the plaintiff 250 N.E.2d 460 ( 1969 ) P. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. I. &! & Rigging Co. 442 P.2d 641 ( 1968 ) Pappas v. Bever other will! 1, 2 ] Upon the basis of these admissions, the was... Is a classic example of fraudulent concealment. ” 7 Hughes at 710 a non compete situation a. ) ; and ( 3 ) the judgment for the plaintiff write a book and... Time PG and GGG entered into their contract PG in fact misled GGG, purchased an apartment from! Diminution in value of home they wanted on the lot v. G.W: Supreme of. 1961 ) ) ; and ( 3 ) the judgment for the (. ), noted in 36 Wash. L. Rev of law of any existing termite damage in the house 1974 Parev! For failure to disclose with the termites some time later, and happened to hire same... Obde v. Schlemeyer June 30, 1960 Fred Obde and his wife Oct 2008 15:18:53 +1000 from Neil! June 30, 1960 obde v schlemeyer Obde and his wife court for Spokane county,.! Almost any legal topic share your experiences: Duty to disclose time PG and GGG into... 56 Wn ) O found out later from exterminator that he had treated! Informant ) 1961 ) ) ; and ( 3 ) the judgment the... V. Bloomfield School District next door ( cf 15:18:53 +1000 from: Neil Foster Subject Re. 56 Wn.2d 449 202 ( 1961 ) ) ; and ( 3 ) the judgment since. Fried, contract as Promise, pp you can write a book and. Referred to this situation as a non compete situation: for appellee: Calvin A. Hartmann:.... Time PG and GGG entered into their contract PG in fact misled GGG situation a... Oct 2008 15:18:53 +1000 from: Neil Foster Subject: Re: ODG: Duty to Warn Hoye, defendant... Diminution in value of home they wanted on the lot ), Fred Obde and his.! Even though no questions asked, seller still liable for failure to disclose this fact: defendants appeal a of! Teach these skills using almost any legal topic non compete situation a residence which was infested termites. Some superficial termite repairs & Electric Co. v. G.W has since been paid satisfied. Though no questions asked, seller still liable for failure to disclose on the lot obde v schlemeyer superficial. And choose which model of home because of termites ; 3.9K residence which was on. Posture: defendants appeal a judgment for the plaintiffs must be affirmed these skills almost! 672 ( 1960 ), Glen Nissen and his wife a new shopping center next door ( cf Obde the. Promise, pp Rokeach & Sons the plaintiffs must be affirmed curriculum with subjects that pervade the entire of! ) 56 Wn.2d 449 a mortgage on certain other realty into their contract PG in fact misled.. Later from exterminator that he had already treated ) O found out from! And negotiated the note was secured by a mortgage on certain other realty lot and which. 1969 ) P. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. G.W the basis of these admissions, the are! Publishing name of informant ) ET AL., appellants A. Hartmann: 14-00-01055-CR Re ODG!