History
  • No items yet
midpage
Morgan v. Cohen
2019 Ohio 3662
Ohio Ct. App.
2019
Read the full case

Background

  • In May–July 2015 Michael Morgan and Hannah Arnson purchased condominium unit #311 in the Random Road Lofts; sellers were Benjamin Cohen and Meg Gerstenblith. The purchase agreement included an "AS IS" clause and incorporated seller-completed disclosure forms (RPDF, condominium addendum, condominium information).
  • During sellers’ ownership the condominium association investigated water-intrusion/construction defects affecting some units; the association executed a tolling agreement with the builder in April 2015. Sellers signed the tolling agreement as individual unit owners.
  • Sellers’ disclosure forms stated no knowledge of material defects, proposed assessments, increased fees, or pending litigation. Buyers had contractual obligations and the opportunity to review association documents (including meeting minutes) but did not review minutes prior to closing.
  • Buyers first learned of association-wide construction concerns and the prospect of special assessments at an association meeting after closing; the association later sued the builder and levied special assessments, and buyers paid roughly $60,000 in assessments.
  • Buyers sued sellers for breach of contract, fraudulent misrepresentation, and fraudulent inducement; trial court granted summary judgment to sellers (and to the sellers’ agent on sellers’ indemnity/contribution claims). The court of appeals affirmed.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether sellers’ disclosure statements were fraudulent or false Buyers: disclosures and sellers’ execution of tolling agreement show sellers knew of building-wide defects, contemplated litigation, and likely assessments; nondisclosure was fraudulent Sellers: disclosures were accurate as to unit and no pending lawsuits; no duty to disclose conditions in other units or speculative future assessments; no false affirmative statements Court: No genuine issue that disclosures were false when made; statements about other units/association did not make sellers liable absent proof of actual knowledge of falsehoods
Whether buyers justifiably relied on sellers’ representations Buyers: relied on seller disclosures and thus were entitled to relief Sellers: buyers had contractual and practical opportunity to inspect association records (including minutes), "as is" clause, and caveat emptor bars reliance; buyers failed to investigate Court: Reliance not justifiable as a matter of law given buyers’ access/contractual duty to review meeting minutes and the "as is" clause (no unequal access or direct affirmative misrepresentations)
Effect of "as is" clause on fraud claim Buyers: clause should not shield sellers from fraudulent concealment/active misrepresentation Sellers: "as is" and caveat emptor relieve sellers of passive nondisclosure liability Court: "As is" bars passive nondisclosure but not active misrepresentation; no evidence of active misrepresentation here, so clause supports summary judgment for sellers
Sellers’ cross-claim against their agent (Northeast) for indemnity/contribution Sellers: agent assisted in preparing disclosures and should indemnify if sellers are liable Northeast: no evidence agent knew of potential assessments or litigation; no basis for contribution/indemnity Court: Affirmed summary judgment for Northeast because sellers did not show agent had requisite knowledge

Key Cases Cited

  • Grafton v. Ohio Edison Co., 77 Ohio St.3d 102 (Ohio 1996) (standard of appellate review for summary judgment; de novo review)
  • Dresher v. Burt, 75 Ohio St.3d 280 (Ohio 1996) (burden-shifting framework for summary judgment)
  • Layman v. Binns, 35 Ohio St.3d 176 (Ohio 1988) (caveat emptor; vendor duty to disclose latent material defects known to seller)
  • Cohen v. Lamko, Inc., 10 Ohio St.3d 167 (Ohio 1984) (elements of actionable fraud)
  • ABM Farms, Inc. v. Woods, 81 Ohio St.3d 498 (Ohio 1998) (party is charged with knowledge of documents they sign; cannot generally rely on unread documents)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: Morgan v. Cohen
Court Name: Ohio Court of Appeals
Date Published: Sep 12, 2019
Citation: 2019 Ohio 3662
Docket Number: 107955
Court Abbreviation: Ohio Ct. App.