Legal Opinion

James v. Naumann

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided February 20, 1985No. 84-1638PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

Our examination of the record in this matter reveals the following language within the Sales Agreement, not brought to our attention by the parties, which we deem conclusive of the claim that the defendants/appellees fraudulently represented that the real property in question would produce a substantial yield and increase in value in future years:

17. It is agreed that through the instrumentality of Naumann & Associates, Inc., the Purchaser became interested in said property but that Purchaser’s decision to buy was based on his inspection and investigation of the property and not on any…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Besett v. BasnettSupreme Court of Florida · 1980
  2. Mankap Enterprises, Inc. v. Wells Fargo Alarm ServicesDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1983
  3. Foxfire Inn of Stuart, Florida, Inc. v. NeffDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1983

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Leviton v. Philly Steak-Out, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1988

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API