Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Douglas v. Visser

Washington Court of Appeal
295 P.3d 800 (2013)


Facts

Terry and Dianne Visser (defendants) purchased a house that needed significant repairs. The Vissers began renovations, but decided to sell the house instead. Nigel and Kathleen Douglas (plaintiffs) made an offer to purchase the house. In the course of the transaction, the Vissers filled out a seller-disclosure statement that indicated they did not know the answers to many of the questions posed. The Douglases asked for clarification, and the Vissers provided supplemental answers. The Douglases did not find the responses adequate, but did not follow up further. The Douglases hired an inspector, Dennis Flaherty, to inspect the property. Flaherty noticed rot and decay near the roof and under the house, but concluded that these issues did not pose a structural threat to the house. The Douglases did not discuss the inspection report with Flaherty or the Vissers. After closing on the house, the Douglases noticed a damp smell and potato bugs inside some of the rooms. The Douglases called Flaherty to inspect the house again. This time, Flaherty found evidence of mold and additional rot, pest, and structural damage to the house. The Douglases defaulted on payment. Flaherty and another inspector examined the property once again and concluded that the Vissers had made repairs before the purchase to conceal the damage. The Douglases sued the Vissers for fraudulent or negligent concealment. The trial court found in favor of the Douglases, and the Vissers appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Appelwick, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 220,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.