From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...
Throckmartin v. Century 21 Top Realty
Supreme Court of Wyoming
226 P.3d 793 (2010)
Kathie Hove (defendant), a real-estate broker for Century 21 TOP Realty (TOP) (defendant), was hired to help Byron Throckmartin and Vanessa Throckmartin (plaintiffs) buy a home. The Throckmartins signed a real-estate-broker agreement stating that Hove and TOP would be intermediaries in the transaction. Hove showed the Throckmartins several homes, but the Throckmartins were interested in a home for sale by Re/Max (defendant) and listed by Re/Max agent Vicki Nelson (defendant). After being shown the home by another Re/Max agent, the Throckmartins decided to purchase the home and scheduled an inspection. The Throckmartins submitted their offer and signed the purchase contract, which placed the responsibility to evaluate the property’s condition on the buyer. The contract also provided that the Throckmartins could not rely on information about the condition of the property relayed by the seller or the seller’s agents. The seller’s property-condition disclosure statement indicated defects in the basement walls that the Throckmartins had spoken about with the seller directly. Hove saw the house for the first time during the scheduled inspection. The inspectors were never given a copy of the seller’s condition disclosure. The Throckmartins subsequently closed on the property. The following year, the Throckmartins discovered that the basement walls had crumbled. The Throckmartins filed suit against TOP, Re/Max, Hove, and Nelson, claiming negligence, breach of contract, and fraudulent concealment of defects. The trial court held that because of their roles as intermediaries, Hove and Nelson were only required to inform the Throckmartins of adverse material facts actually known to the intermediaries, and that there was insufficient evidence of the intermediaries’ knowledge. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants. The Throckmartins appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Hill, J)
What to do next…
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.
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 219,000 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.