Wasser v. Sasoni

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the sellers' statements to the buyer that the apartment building was \a very good building\ requiring \normal type of maintenance\ and \an excellent deal\ were statements of opinion
• concluding a misrepresentation is not actionable where its truth might have been discovered by the exercise of ordinary diligence
• finding that reliance was not justifiable where buyer of commercial property had ample opportunity to inspect the property and could have discovered alleged defects through the exercise of ordinary diligence
• noting that “a negligent purchaser is not justified in relying upon a misrepresentation which is obviously false, and ‘which would be patent to him if he had utilized his opportunity to make a cursory examination or investigation’ ”
• finding a seller’s representations that a building was “a very good building” and “an excellent deal” were “clearly statements of opinion” and not actionable
• finding a sophisticated party was not justified in relying on fact available to party through reasonable diligence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).