Unformatted text preview: DECISION The court expanded the traditional caveat emptor rule for latent defects . REASONING Must look at the tort distinctions between misfeasance and nonfeasance. One is liable for affirmative acts of harm misfeasance, but not for failing to act nonfeasance. Florida had previously followed Caveat Emptor, and mere nondisclosure did not constitute a fraudulent concealment. The court rejects this, stating full disclosure of all material facts must be made when ever elementary fair conduct demands it....
View Full Document
- Spring '08
- Tort Law, Supreme Court of the United States, Caveat Emptor, Supreme Court of Florida