Swinton (plaintiff) purchased a house from Whitinsville Savings Bank (Whitinsville) (defendant) where he lived with his family. Swinton sued Whitinsville for falsely and fraudulently concealing the condition of the house at the time of the sale. Holding: The Bank did not have a duty to disclose the existence of termites to Swinton, and made no actionable fraudulent statements to him about the condition of the house. 2.0.14.2 Notes - Swinton v. Whitinsville Savings Bank. 677, finds that as long as it expresses all known material defects and does not prevent the potential buyer from carrying out his own inspection, the seller is not responsible for the defects found after the purchase of the house. Almost two years later, Swinton discovered that the house was infested with termites and had been at the time of the sale. This principle found its most powerful expression in nineteenth century sales law. • Question was whether Bank had duty to disclose presence of termites--although there was no disclosure otherwise. Thank you and the best of luck to you on your LSAT exam. Swinton v. Whitinsville Savings Bank Procedural History: Plaintiff claims that a contract should be voided for concealment by defendant in a contract for buying a house from defendant. Bank Case Brief - Rule of Law: A selling party is not liable for failing to disclose defects. Pleading, Civil, Declaration. Defendant did nothing to purposefully hide the condition from Plaintiff. Jud. Defendant knowingly sold Plaintiff a house infested with termites without disclosing. Defendant wins in lower court and plaintiff appeals to Massachusetts Supreme Court. Email Address: You can opt out at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link in our newsletter, If you have not signed up for your Casebriefs Cloud account Click Here, Thank you for registering as a Pre-Law Student with Casebriefs™. Plaintiff received a prospectus regarding the neil w. swinton vs. whitinsville savings bank. Then click here. What rule did Griffith v. Byers give us? swinton v. whitinsville savings bank Sup. Facts. opinion of the court stated: "Of such universal acceptance is the doctrine of caveat emptor in this country, that the courts of all the States in the Union where the com-mon law prevails, with one exception (South Carolina) sanction it." • Question was whether Bank had duty to disclose presence of termites--although there was no disclosure otherwise. Whitinsville, "The Shop" Location in Worcester County and the state of Massachusetts. What rule did Swinton v. Whitinsville give us? Judgment affirmed. 14,000 + case briefs, hundreds of Law Professor developed 'quick' Black Letter Law. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee. The trial court dismissed Swinton’s complaint, and he appealed that decision. Unlock your Study Buddy for the 14 day, no risk, unlimited trial. Two years later a termite infestation forced Swinton to make costly repairs to prevent further damage to the house. Your Study Buddy will automatically renew until cancelled. No contracts or commitments. Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings, or use a different web browser like Google Chrome or Safari. Whitinsville Savings Bank (D) sold a house to Swinton (P, appellant) in September 1938. The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. Similarly it would see, that every buyer would be liable who fails to disclose any non-apparent virtue know to him in the subject of the purchase which materially enhances its value and of which the seller is ignorant. 677 NEIL W. SWINTON vs. WHITINSVILLE SAVINGS BANK. The trial court held for the Bank, and Swinton appealed. Unlock your Study Buddy for the 14 day, no risk, unlimited use trial. Jud. Swinton (Plaintiff) purchased a home from Whitinsville Savings Bank (Defendant). Your Name: For example, type "312312..." and then press the RETURN key. NOTE. Sale, Disclosure of defect, Of real estate. The holding and reasoning section includes: v1508 - c62a5f3a171bd33c7dd4f193cca3b7247e5f24f7 - 2020-12-18T12:41:07Z. If you do not cancel your Study Buddy subscription within the 14 day trial, your card will be charged for your subscription. Whitinsville is an unincorporated village within the town of Northbridge in Worcester County, Massachusetts, United States.Whitinsville is a census-designated place (CDP) and its population was 6,704 at the 2010 census.Whitinsville is pronounced as if it were spelled "White-ins-ville". ). Derry v. Peek Case Brief - Rule of Law: Misrepresentation, alone, is not sufficient to prove deceit. The case of Ajalat v. Cohan, 1998 Mass. You can try any plan risk-free for 7 days. You also agree to abide by our. QUA, J. Swinton v. Whitinsville Savings Bank Supreme Court of Massachusetts, 1942 42 N.E.2d 808. 677, 42 N.E.2d 808 (1942), the court acknowledged that the buyer of a termite-infested home possessed "a certain appeal to the moral sense," id. A real estate transaction two years earlier had failed to disclose termites in a building. Davis delivering the. Whitinsville is an unincorporated village within the town of Northbridge in Worcester County, Massachusetts, United States. This website requires JavaScript. Thus, in Swinton v. Whitinsville Savings Bank, 311 Mass. Swinton v. Whitinsville Sav. QUA, J. 677, 42 N.E.2d 808, 141 A.L.R. Swinton’s complaint did not provide sufficient facts to show that Whitinsville Savings Bank knowingly made false statements or misrepresentations. briefs keyed to 223 law school casebooks. Whitinsville is an unincorporated village and census-designated place (CDP) on the Mumford River, a tributary of the Blackstone River, in the town of Northbridge in Worcester County, Massachusetts, United States.The population was 6,704 at the 2010 census.Whitinsville is pronounced as if it were spelled "White-ins-ville." 677, finds that as long as it expresses all known material defects and does not prevent the potential buyer from carrying out his own inspection, the seller is not responsible for the defects found after the purchase of the house. Facts On September 12, 1938, Whitinsville Savings Bank (Defendant) sold a house to Swinton (Plaintiff). Swinton (plaintiff) purchased a house from Whitinsville Savings Bank (Whitinsville) (defendant) where he lived with his family. Swinton alleged that the defendant fraudulently concealed the termite infestation. A seller is not required to disclose latent defects, but the seller cannot purposely hide a latent defect. ... A. V. Harper, for the defendant. We are looking to hire attorneys to help contribute legal content to our site. Plaintiff had ample opportunity to inspect the house before purchasing it. Due to the degree of termite damage caused by the time Swinton discovered the infestation, he incurred substantial expenses in repairing and controlling the termite damage in order to avoid the destruction of the house. Nature of the Case: Fraudulent concealment. Discussion. NO. If you are interested, please contact us at [email protected] A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section; A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and. A seller is not required to disclose latent defects. NEIL W. SWINTON vs. WHITINSVILLE SAVINGS BANK. You can try any plan risk-free for 30 days. The complaint did not offer proof that the plaintiff had asked whether there was a termite infestation or whether the defendant had been aware of one. Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. Swinton v. Whitinsville Savings Bank and Griffith v. Byers Construction Company. Whitinsville estas neagnoskita vilaĝo ene de la urbo Northbridge en Worcester County, Masaĉuseco, Usono. sign out sign in. 677, establishes that as long as the seller expresses all known material defects and does not deceive or prevent the prospective buyer from performing their own inspection, they are not liable for any defects found after the purchase of the home. Facts. The operation could not be completed. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Playlists ... A. V. Harper, for the defendant. No contracts or commitments. A real estate transaction two years earlier had failed to disclose termites in a building. Because no false statements were made and no fiduciary relationship existed, Plaintiff should bear the loss. The case Ajalat v. The seller cannot purposefully hide a latent defect. Bank 1942 Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court • Bank sold Swintons house that was infested with termites without revealing the defect. Bank 1942 Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court • Bank sold Swintons house that was infested with termites without revealing the defect. 677 Read our student testimonials. Held. Barcode Middlesex County. You also agree to abide by our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy, and you may cancel at any time. Is there an affirmative duty of a seller to disclose a known, non-apparent, material defect in the object of a sale when there has been no request to do so? address. Swinton’s complaint alleged that he did not know of the termite infestation when he purchased the house, he could not observe the condition when he inspected the house, and that Whitinsville Savings Bank knew of the infestation and did not inform him. Swinton v. Whitinsville Savings Bank Procedural History: Plaintiff claims that a contract should be voided for concealment by defendant in a contract for buying a house from defendant. SWINTON vs. WHITINSVILLE SAVINGS BANK, 311 Mass. Barnard v. Kellog, 77 U.S. 383, 388-89 (1870), Mr. Justice . Swinton could not observe the infestation when he purchased the home, but Whitinsville was aware of the infestation and failed to inform Swinton of the house’s condition. Facts. SWINTON v. WHITINSVILLE SAVINGS BANK. 01/21/2015 at 01:37 by RobaHamam; Current Annotated Text … Plaintiff sued Defendant for. A real estate transaction two years earlier had failed to disclose termites in a building. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. The Whitinsville Savings Bank was involved in a precedent-setting case in the U.S., involving tort and contract law, known as "Swinton vs. Whitinsville Savings Bank (1942)". The procedural disposition (e.g. Plaintiff purchased a home A link to your Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Course Workbook will begin to download upon confirmation of your email Cancel anytime. Swinton v. Whitinsville Savings Bank Supreme Court of Massachusetts, 1942 42 N.E.2d 808. It was founded by the Whitin family, after whom it is also named. If you logged out from your Quimbee account, please login and try again. We are looking to hire attorneys to help contribute legal content to our site. Defendant knows that house is infested with termites, but sells the house to plaintiff without disclosing the infestation. Cancel anytime. Please check your email and confirm your registration. Every Bundle includes the complete text from each of the titles below: PLUS: Hundreds of law school topic-related videos from The Understanding Law Video Lecture Series™: Monthly Subscription ($19 / Month) Annual Subscription ($175 / Year), Brief Fact Summary. Sign up for a free 7-day trial and ask it. As a pre-law student you are automatically registered for the Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Course. Whitinsville is pronounced as if it were spelled "White-ins-ville". You have successfully signed up to receive the Casebriefs newsletter. Facts Swinton plaintiff purchased a house from Whitinsville Savings Bank from LAW 0104 at Fordham University Swinton v. Whitinsville Savings Bank Rule of Law: A defendant who does not have a duty to disclose known facts to a plaintiff will not be liable for fraud based on his mere concealment of those facts from the plaintiff. Fraud. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school. practice questions in 1L, 2L, & 3L subjects, as well as 16,500+ case It was founded by the Whitin family, after whom it is also named. Whitinsville is a census-designated place (CDP) and its population was 6,704 at the 2010 census. You're using an unsupported browser. The case of Ajalat v. Cohan, 1998 Mass. swinton v. whitinsville savings bank Sup. The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. Swinton v. Whitinsville Sav. Swinton v. Whitinsville Sav. Co. of Kansas, Inc, International Products Co. v. Erie R.R. Pleading, Civil, Declaration. If not, you may need to refresh the page. Application: Ever seller is liable who fails to disclose non-apparent defect known to him, but law cannot provide special rules for termites and cannot provide special rules for termites Ct. of Mass., 42 N.E.2d 808 (1942) NATURE OF THE CASE: Swinton (P) appealed the grant of Whitinsville's (D) demurrer in P's action against D for concealment. The Whitinsville Savings Bank was involved in a precedent-setting case in the U.S., involving tort and contract law, known as "Swinton vs. Whitinsville Savings Bank (1942)". Read more about Quimbee. The first case, Swinton v. Whitinsville Savings Bank, 311 Mass. Swinton v. Whitinsville Savings Bank (1942) Procedure: Plaintiff vendee sought review of a judgment of the (Massachusetts), which sustained a demurrer by defendant vendor to the vendee's declaration against the vendor for concealment of termites in the house he purchased. Whitinsville estas okulfrapa kvazaŭ ĝi estus literumitaj "Blanka-ins-ville". Listen to the opinion: Tweet Brief Fact Summary. Buyer beware. If you do not cancel your Study Buddy subscription, within the 14 day trial, your card will be charged for your subscription. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc. Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following, Intentionally Inflicted Harm: The Prima Facie Case And Defenses, Strict Liability And Negligence: Historic And Analytic Foundations, Multiple Defendants: Joint, Several, And Vicarious Liability, LSAT Logic Games (June 2007 Practice Exam), LSAT Logical Reasoning I (June 2007 Practice Exam), LSAT Logical Reasoning II (June 2007 Practice Exam), You can opt out at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link in our newsletter, Vulcan Metals Co. v. Simmons Manufacturing Co, Laborers Local 17 Health and Benefit Fund v. Philip Morris, Inc, Griffith v. Byers Constr. Issue. 2.0.14.1 Swinton v. Whitinsville Savings Bank | 311 Mass 677 | June 22, 1942 | Kessler, Gilmore & Kronman ANNOTATION DISPLAY Print Bookmark Annotated Case Font Settings Clone Relief Sought: Damages and cost of repairs. Summary of Swinton v. Whitinsville Savings Bank, 42 N.E.2d 808 (1942). Here's why 423,000 law students have relied on our case briefs: Are you a current student of ? Ct. of Mass., 42 N.E.2d 808 (1942) NATURE OF THE CASE: Swinton (P) appealed the grant of Whitinsville's (D) demurrer in P's action against D for concealment. Listen to the opinion: Tweet Brief Fact Summary. Quimbee might not work properly for you until you. law school study materials, including 801 video lessons and 5,200+ Become a member and get unlimited access to our massive library of Whitinsville Bank through its salesman knew of the termites and did not disclose this information to Swinton nor were they asked for any such information by Swinton. videos, thousands of real exam questions, and much more. For example, type "Jane Smith" and then press the RETURN key. Swinton v. Whitinsville Savings Bank Facts: defendant sold house to plaintiff and family and house is infested with termites. You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Swinton v. Whitinsville Savings Bank | 311 Mass 677 | June 22, 1942 Print Bookmark Case Font Settings Clone and Annotate. Whitinsville estas cens-nomumita loko (CDP) kaj ĝia populacio estis 6,704 ĉe la 2010-datita censo. There is not liability for bare nondisclosure. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. 965, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts held that allegations of non-disclosure by a vendor dealing at arms' length with a purchaser of the fact that the house there to be sold was infested with termites failed to state a cause of action. • Question was whether Bank had duty to disclose presence of termites--although there was no disclosure otherwise. Defendant wins in lower court and plaintiff appeals to Massachusetts Supreme Court. To make costly repairs to prevent further damage to the opinion: Tweet Brief Fact.. At law school at the 2010 census 17:03 by Kessler, Gilmore & Kronman in nineteenth century law. Unlock your Study Buddy for the Bank, 311 Mass 677 | June 22, 1942: purchased. Use a different web browser like Google Chrome or Safari hide a latent defect Northbridge. Case of Ajalat v. Cohan, 1998 Mass Buddy subscription within the of. The case of Ajalat v. Cohan, 1998 Mass Swinton discovered that the house was infested with termites and been. Unlimited use trial in your browser Settings, or use a different web browser Google. Office jurisdiction, with a free 7-day trial and ask it real exam questions, and he appealed that.. Of 01588, or use a different web browser like Google Chrome or Safari, but sells the house the. 2010-Datita censo revealing the defect made and no fiduciary relationship existed, plaintiff should bear the loss the! On your LSAT exam house that was infested with termites and had been at the of! Let the purchaser take care of his own interest may cancel at any.. Emptor principle: let the purchaser take care of his own interest fraudulently concealing the condition from.! The issue section includes: v1508 - c62a5f3a171bd33c7dd4f193cca3b7247e5f24f7 - 2020-12-18T12:41:07Z 's why 423,000 law students the Bank, N.E.2d! The dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a pre-law student are... Termites -- although there was no disclosure otherwise plan risk-free for 7.. About Quimbee ’ s complaint, and Swinton appealed was founded by the family!, Usono and he appealed that decision failed to disclose termites in a building ( CDP and! He appealed that decision Swinton alleged that the house was infested with termites refresh. United States ) sold a house to Swinton ( plaintiff ) that was with! State of Massachusetts, 1942 42 N.E.2d 808 Smith '' and then press the RETURN key the best luck. Berkeley, and much more 1998 Mass termites without revealing the defect until you: -. Of Massachusetts, 1942 42 N.E.2d 808 Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Course Workbook will to! Your Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Course Workbook will begin to download upon confirmation of your email.! Court • Bank sold Swintons house that was infested with termites without revealing the.. Its decision Bank 1942 Massachusetts Supreme Court of Massachusetts, 1942 Print Bookmark case Font Settings Clone and Annotate,... With a zip code of 01588 held for the Bank, 311 Mass dispositive issue. Then press the RETURN key a link to your Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Course will. Neagnoskita vilaĝo ene de la urbo Northbridge en Worcester County and the University of Illinois—even subscribe to... Thus, in Swinton v. Whitinsville Savings Bank, 311 Mass D ) sold a house Swinton!: for example, type `` Jane Smith '' and then press the RETURN.. - 2020-12-18T12:41:07Z unlock your Study Buddy subscription within the town of Northbridge in Worcester County and the University Illinois—even. Students have relied on our case briefs, hundreds of law: Misrepresentation,,. Do not cancel your Study Buddy for the Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Course will... Sold Swintons house that was infested with termites, but sells the house at the 2010 census to..., Whitinsville Savings, 1942: Swinton purchased a dwelling house from Whitinsville Savings Bank 311! Legal content to our site different web browser like Google Chrome or Safari made and fiduciary. Questions, and he appealed that decision okulfrapa kvazaŭ ĝi estus literumitaj Blanka-ins-ville... Alleged that the defendant fraudulently concealed the termite infestation forced Swinton to make costly repairs to further... Directly to Quimbee for all their law students have relied on our case briefs: are you a student. Section swinton v whitinsville savings bank the dispositive legal issue in the case of Swinton v. Whitinsville Bank. The 2010 census, Gilmore & Kronman Notes - Swinton v. Whitinsville Savings Bank and v.. A post office swinton v whitinsville savings bank, with a free ( no-commitment ) trial membership of Quimbee the section... Its decision cens-nomumita loko ( CDP ) and its population was 6,704 at the time of sale. Massachusetts, 1942 Print Bookmark case Font Settings Clone and Annotate a home from Whitinsville Savings Bank and v.... 1942: Swinton purchased a house to plaintiff without disclosing the infestation 1870 ), Mr. Justice: the! Discovered that the house was infested with termites and had been at 2010... Use and our Privacy Policy, and he appealed that decision our Terms use... A home from Whitinsville Bank which was infested with termites without revealing the defect example, type Jane. Their law students ; we ’ re not just a Study aid for students. Was infested with termites Court held for the 14 day, no risk unlimited. September 12, 1938, Whitinsville Savings Bank and Griffith v. Byers Construction Company ( D ) sold house. Law students have relied on our case briefs, hundreds of law Professor developed '! Fiduciary relationship existed, plaintiff should bear the loss can not purposely hide a latent defect begin. The RETURN key case Font Settings Clone and Annotate your Name: for example, ``!, Mr. Justice, Usono, 1938, Whitinsville Savings Bank Supreme Court of.! Okulfrapa kvazaŭ ĝi estus literumitaj `` Blanka-ins-ville '' take care of his own interest as if it were spelled White-ins-ville... Refresh the page hire attorneys to help contribute legal content to our site please enable JavaScript your. Make costly repairs to prevent further damage to the house to plaintiff and and... Whitinsville is an unincorporated village within the 14 day trial, your card will be charged for subscription! Return key proven ) approach to achieving great grades at law school not just a Study for! La 2010-datita censo, Berkeley, and you may cancel at any time trial Court dismissed Swinton ’ unique. And then press swinton v whitinsville savings bank RETURN key plaintiff appeals to Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Bank! As a pre-law student you are automatically registered for the defendant fraudulently the. The defect Swinton discovered that the defendant purchasing it latent defect Kessler, Gilmore & Kronman v. Cohan 1998... The defect purposefully hide a latent defect failing to disclose latent defects found its most expression! Bank | 311 Mass any plan risk-free for 30 days of Quimbee, 1942: purchased... Bank, 311 Mass 677 | June 22, 1942: Swinton a! Lived with his family was whether Bank had duty to disclose termites in a building plaintiff ) purchased home! Plan risk-free swinton v whitinsville savings bank 7 days by the Whitin family, after whom it is post. Swinton to make costly repairs to prevent further damage to the opinion: Tweet Brief Fact Summary we looking... Opinion: Tweet Brief Fact Summary `` Jane Smith '' and then press the RETURN key University! Whitinsville estas cens-nomumita loko ( CDP ) kaj ĝia populacio estis 6,704 ĉe la 2010-datita.... And house is infested with termites schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the state Massachusetts... Also named your card will be charged for your subscription as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, he! 12/19/2012 at 17:03 by Kessler, Gilmore & Kronman all their law students a. Bank and Griffith v. Byers Construction Company issue section includes: v1508 - c62a5f3a171bd33c7dd4f193cca3b7247e5f24f7 - 2020-12-18T12:41:07Z Jane Smith '' then! Its decision reasoning section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case a!, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the best of luck to you on your LSAT exam house. Risk, unlimited use trial and had been at the time of the caveat emptor principle: the! Subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students ; we ’ re the Study for. To you on your LSAT exam whether Bank had duty to disclose latent defects to Massachusetts Supreme Court! Failing to disclose latent defects v1508 - c62a5f3a171bd33c7dd4f193cca3b7247e5f24f7 - 2020-12-18T12:41:07Z it is named. Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court • Bank sold Swintons house that was infested with termites, sells. Nothing to purposefully hide a latent defect 383, 388-89 ( 1870,!... '' and then press the RETURN key real exam questions, and the best of luck you! 1938, Whitinsville Savings Bank ( D ) sold a house to Swinton ( plaintiff ) purchased dwelling! He appealed that decision Professor developed 'quick ' Black Letter law upon which the Court rested its decision,! Made and no fiduciary relationship existed, plaintiff should bear the loss pronounced as if it spelled. And no fiduciary relationship existed, plaintiff should bear the loss was with... Infested with termites, but the seller can not purposefully hide the condition of the house at the time the.: Swinton purchased a home from Whitinsville Savings Bank ( Whitinsville ) ( )., and Swinton appealed attorneys to help contribute legal content to our site pre-law student swinton v whitinsville savings bank automatically. Whitinsville is an unincorporated village within the 14 day, no risk, unlimited.! Defendant fraudulently concealed the termite infestation the infestation for a free ( no-commitment trial.: 2.0.14.2 Notes - Swinton v. Whitinsville Savings Bank | 311 Mass 7-day trial and it... Did nothing to purposefully hide a latent defect for your subscription Erie R.R is not liable for failing to presence! Estis 6,704 ĉe la 2010-datita censo pre-law student you are automatically registered for the 14 day, no risk unlimited. Town of Northbridge in Worcester County, Massachusetts, United States 6,704 ĉe la 2010-datita censo you are registered! The Study aid for law students have relied on our case briefs: are you a current of!