Benjamin & Karen Noblitt v Bluegreen

Selected Events:

March 20, 2019 Order [29] denying in part BG M2D: fraud based on vicarious liability sufficiently pled re “rental pitch, ” Barclay card w/ 15.9% interest; justifiable reliance on specific statements (not merely opinion/puffery), citing Rest (2d) of Torts § 649(2), cmt c (1977) (“a purchaser is justified in assuming that even his vendor’s opinion has some basis of fact, and therefore in believing that the vendor knows of nothing which makes his opinion fantastic”); and Rest (2d) of Torts § 538(2)(1977) re materiality. Disclaimer/merger clause (NO PURCHASER SHOULD RELY UPON REPRESENTATIONS OTHER THAN THOSE INCLUDED IN THIS AGREEMENT) does not immunize Ds fm fraud. “Unlike contract law, tort law’s purpose is not to hold parties to the benefit of a bargained agreement. Instead, tort law seeks to impose societal duties that proscribe acceptable standards of conduct between individuals;” SOL defense rejected based on delayed discovery rule; TN Timeshare Act provides a private right of action;