Legal Opinion
Fischer v. Heymann
Indiana Court of Appeals
Decided February 24, 2011No. 49A04-1004-PL-231PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ROBB, Judge.
Case Summary and Issues
Michael and Noel Heymann (collectively the “Heymanns”) backed out of an agreement to purchase a condominium from Gayle Fischer, and Fischer sued. Following a bench trial, Fischer appeals the trial court’s judgment in favor of the Hey-manns, ordering that Fischer reimburse their earnest money deposit and pay their litigation costs and attorney’s fees. On appeal Fischer raises two issues, which we restate as: 1) whether the trial court clearly erred in concluding the property’s electrical concerns constitute “major de*898fects” as defined in the purchase…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Four Seasons Manufacturing, Inc. v. 1001 Coliseum, LLCIndiana Court of Appeals · 2007
- Walton v. Claybridge Homeowners Ass'n, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 2005
- Angelone v. ChangIndiana Court of Appeals · 2001
3Cited by14 opinions
- Gayle Fischer v. Michael and Noel HeymannIndiana Supreme Court · 2014
- John M. Abbott, LLC, Class Representative and All Others Similarly Situated v. Lake City BankIndiana Court of Appeals · 2014
- Brill v. Regent Communications, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 2014
- The Bar Plan Mutual Insurance Company v. Likes Law Office, LLC Kevin L. Likes Rickey D. Whitaker and Cheryl L. WhitakerIndiana Court of Appeals · 2015
- Performance Services, Inc., an Indiana Corporation and Huntingburg Machine Works, Inc., an Indiana Corporation v. Hanover Insurance Company, as Subrogee of the Southwest Dubois County SchoolsIndiana Court of Appeals · 2017
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.