Indirect Reliance | North Carolina Lawyers Weekly

North Carolina Lawyers Weekly > Indirect Reliance

Tort/Negligence – Negligent Misrepresentation Claim – Real Property – Appraisal — Indirect Reliance – Fraud – Punitive Damages

By North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff
Published: June 14,2012

Abraham v. Jauregui In their negligent misrepresentation claim, the plaintiff-purchasers allege that, by relying on appraisal management company HomeFocus Services, LLC’s and Bank of America’s actions in approving plaintiffs’ loan applications, plaintiffs were also relying, albeit indirectly, upon the defendant-appraisers’ representations provided to HomeFocus and Bank of America, which were contained in the appraisal reports. However, in order to state a claim for negligent misrepresentation, plaintiffs must allege direct rather than indirect reliance.

Tort/Negligence – Professional Liability – Real Property – Appraiser – Indirect Reliance – Attorneys – Revenue Stamps Amount – Developer — Breach of Contract – Fraud

By North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff
Published: June 6,2012

Anderson v. Coastal Communities at Ocean Ridge Plantation, Inc. Where the plaintiff-buyers alleged, at most, that they relied on the bank’s acceptance of an appraisal report in making their decisions to buy property from the defendant-developers, such indirect reliance is insufficient to state a professional negligence claim against the defendant-appraisers.

Recent NC Court Opinions

Environmental – Sedimentation Pollution Control Act – Private Action – Violation Required – Civil Practice – Standing – Administrative
Applewood Properties, LLC v. New South Properties, LLC Because the county Natural Resources Department never found the defendant-contractor to be in violation of any law, rule, order or erosion and sedimentation and control plan, plaintiff did not have standing to bring a civil action under the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act to seek redress for its injuries.
Tort/Negligence – Malicious Prosecution – Initiation – Restatement Standard — Giving Information to Police
North Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co. v. Cully’s Motorcross Park, Inc. Even though defendant Volpe would probably never have been charged with obtaining property by false pretenses if the plaintiff-insurance company’s investigator had not told a police sergeant the results of his investigation, we reject this “but for” standard as the method for proving the initiation element of malicious prosecution.
Tort/Negligence – Personal Injury – Shooting – 52-Year-Old Shooter – Parents’ Gun
Bridges v. Parrish We reject plaintiff’s claim that defendants are liable for failing to secure their gun, thereby allowing their 52-year-old son to gain access to the gun and shoot plaintiff with it.

> All News...

Tort/Negligence – Negligent Misrepresentation Claim – Real Property – Appraisal — Indirect Reliance – Fraud – Punitive Damages

Tort/Negligence – Professional Liability – Real Property – Appraiser – Indirect Reliance – Attorneys – Revenue Stamps Amount – Developer — Breach of Contract – Fraud

Recent NC Court Opinions

CALENDAR