DeWolfe v. Hingham Centre, Ltd.
464 Mass. 795
| Mass. | 2013Background
- DeWolfe purchased a Norwell property after a broker advert posted it as zoned Business B, based on sellers’ information.
- Tribunas listed the property and provided Richards with representations claiming zoning as Residential Business B or Business B; Richards advertised accordingly.
- Residential Business B is not an actual Norwell zoning designation; Richards believed and conveyed Business B despite lack of evidencing business use nearby.
- DeWolfe learned in 2005 that the property was zoned Residential B and not suited for a six-station hair salon.
- A December 2004 purchase agreement included a broad exculpatory warranties clause stating buyer relied only on those warranties set forth in writing, except stated warranties by seller or broker.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Duty of broker to investigate zoning representations | DeWolfe argues Richards owed a duty to exercise reasonable care and verify zoning information. | Richards/Hingham Centre contend no duty to confirm zoning status beyond seller-provided information. | Broker has a duty to exercise reasonable care; fact finder determines reliance on seller information. |
| Effect of the exculpatory clause on reliance | Clause does not bar reliance on prior written representations by seller or broker. | Clause precludes reliance on any warranties or representations not in writing in the agreement. | Clause permits reliance on prior written representations not set forth or incorporated in the agreement. |
| Summary judgment on misrepresentation and 93A claims | Evidence supports misrepresentation and unfair or deceptive acts; issues of fact remain unresolved. | No triable issues after applying the clause and duty analysis; judgment should be affirmed. | Not entitled to judgment as a matter of law; disputes over facts remain for trial. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gossels v. Fleet Nat’l Bank, 453 Mass. 366 (Mass. 2009) (negligent misrepresentation standard and reasonable care by broker)
- Maxwell v. Ratcliffe, 356 Mass. 560 (Mass. 1969) (broker liable where reliance on unreliable information)
- Quinlan v. Clasby, 71 Mass. App. Ct. 97 (Mass. App. Ct. 2008) (broker may rely on seller information unless circumstances indicate unreliability)
- Dias v. Brigham Med. Assocs., Inc., 438 Mass. 317 (Mass. 2002) (summary judgment standard and 93A framework)
- O’Connor v. Merrimack Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 73 Mass. App. Ct. 205 (Mass. App. Ct. 2008) (intentional/reckless misrepresentation pleading standard)