Jue v. Smiser
California Court of Appeal
28 Cal. Rptr. 2d 242 (1994)
Geoffrey and Charlene Jue (plaintiffs) were shown a brochure claiming their prospective home was designed by architect Julia Morgan while working with the sellers' agent, Tabaloff & Company. The Jues signed a purchase agreement with Ken and Victoria Smiser (defendants) on April 27, 1992. On June 8, they signed closing documents including a disclaimer noting no city-filed blueprints confirmed the Morgan design. Over the next two days, Morgan's daughter told the Jues she knew of no documents certifying the home as her mother's work, yet the Jues closed escrow on June 11 anyway. Months later, they sued the Smisers and Tabaloff for fraud and misrepresentation. The trial court granted the Smisers summary judgment, ruling that closing escrow despite knowing about the potential misrepresentation barred the Jues' claims. The Jues appealed.
Whether a real-property buyer forfeits the right to sue for damages by closing escrow after discovering a possible material misrepresentation that arose following the signed purchase agreement.