Thorsten P. Sundberg v. TTR Realty, LLC
109 A.3d 1123
| D.C. | 2015Background
- In fall 2012, Sundberg and Huang purchased a residence from Winer using TTR Realty and Abu-Rahmeh as agents.
- Plaintiffs allege that after signing the sales contract but before closing, defendants provided false information and withheld material information about impending construction at the neighboring Old Pawn Shop.
- Construction began after plaintiffs moved in and allegedly diminished the property's value and desirability.
- Plaintiffs claim they would have breached the contract and pursued contract remedies had they been truthfully informed.
- The trial court dismissed some counts, holding no detrimental reliance for misrepresentation/omission and rejecting CPPA liability for a non-merchant.
- TTR Realty and Abu-Rahmeh's motion for judgment followed Winer's dismissal; the court partially granted judgment, keeping CPPA against merchants, and the case proceeded to an appeal on Rule 54(b) grounds.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| CPPA liability for non-merchants | Winer liable via aiding/conspiracy with merchants | CPPA does not authorize aider/abetter or conspiracy liability for non-merchants | CPPA does not permit non-merchants to be liable as aiding/abetting or conspirators |
| Detrimental reliance for post-contract misrepresentations | Misrepresentations post-signing deprive them of contract fruits | No pre-signing reliance; no right to breach; post-signing misrepresentations cannot create reliance | Plaintiffs failed to plead detrimental reliance for misrepresentations occurring after signing |
| Breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing | Withholding information about neighboring construction violated the covenant | Plaintiffs received the fruits of the contract (title) and contract did not require disclosure of neighboring conditions | No breach; misrepresentations about the Old Pawn Shop did not deprive plaintiffs of fruits of the contract |
Key Cases Cited
- District Cablevision Ltd. P’ship v. Bassin, 828 A.2d 714 (D.C. 2003) (remedial CPPA aims; liberal construction to promote purpose)
- Grayson v. AT&T Corp., 15 A.3d 219 (D.C. 2011) (CPPA liberal construction; consumer protections)
- Snowder v. District of Columbia, 949 A.2d 590 (D.C. 2008) (CPPA coverage limited to consumer-merchant relationships)
- Howard v. Riggs Nat'l Bank, 432 A.2d 701 (D.C. 1981) (definition of merchant; scope of CPPA)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (U.S. 2009) (plausibility standard for pleading factual content)