Pathare v. Goolsby

I respectfully dissent. I would affirm Judge Rainwater in her ruling on the breach of warranty as well as the fraudulent misrepresentation count. While I do not argue with the majority opinion concerning its statement as to the principles of construction, I disagree with its conclusion. I would find that the instrument itself reveals that the Goolsbys owned only a one-half interest and were, by express language in the instrument, conveying only a one-half interest. It is unreasonable that the Pathares should expect that the Gools-bys were warranting more than they were conveying. The majority…