1. Why would a seller risk the possibility of a lawsuit by providing a prospective buyer with

false information about the object of their sale? In this particular case, the seller can get

away with this at times because of unfortunately if it’s not stated in the contract then his

word does not hold weight. Sometimes a seller believes the profit will outweigh the risk

and take their chances in court if need be.

2. Did Shivley’s misrepresentations rise to the level of fraud? Explain. Even though

Shivley did state he would winterize the property, this was back in November. An

inspection took place at this time and everything appeared to be ok. However the offer

was rejected therefore immaterial to the purchase at this time. It is also the responsibility

of the buyer to inspect a property before purchasing. He has every right to inspect the

property, however failed to do so. He assumed the property was in good condition based

on the inspection in November and the statement from the seller that the property had

been winterized.

3. Do you agree with the court’s decision regarding the punitive damages? Why or why not?

I do not agree with the court’s decision. Reason being as stated before the obligation of

the buyer is to inspect the property before signing a purchase agreement. Inside the

purchase agreement it stated that he was to buy the property, “as it”. Relying on an

inspection that happened in November is not admissible to the court as this was also done

under a different purchase agreement. The seller did do his due diligence in hiring a

company to come in and winterize the property.