Laybourn v. City of Wasilla

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that buyers should discover information available by “ordinary inspection and inquiry” (quoting Matthews v. Kincaid, 746 P.2d 470, 472 (Alaska 1987))
• finding no special relationship between city and citizen in easement agreement context
• “To prevail on their misrepresentation claim, the Laybourns were required to prove the existence of either an affirmative misrepresentation or an omission where there was a duty to disclose.” (footnotes omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).