Quantcast

Appeals court rules buyer gets nothing in real estate contract case

SOUTHEAST TEXAS RECORD

Sunday, December 22, 2024

Appeals court rules buyer gets nothing in real estate contract case

State Court
General court 06

shutterstock.com

HOUSTON — A Texas appeals court has reversed Harrison County's 164th District Court's ruling in a real estate contract case.  Justice Richard Hightower's opinion was filed earlier this month in the Court of Appeals for the First DIstrict of Texas.

Leslie and Jeanette Pogue owned a 33-year-old house.  They purchased a 4.5 acre Crosby property in 2000, but eight years later it was damaged by Hurricane Ike. The Pogues used insurance to make repairs such as replacing the roof and repainting. In 2009 they moved to Bellville and put their house on the market. After seven months without a buyer, the Pogues hired a real estate agent. 

The house sat vacant for more than a year when Elizabeth Williamson's future husband Lewis Walker expressed interest in it. Walker had poor credit, and couldn't qualify for a loan, so Williamson put an offer on the house. Williamson visited the property she noticed the overgrowth was so severe she couldn't see the landscaping, the inside of the house had a musty smell, and the carpet needed replacing. Williamson and the Pogues entered into a money contract.  The Pogues had asked for $235,000, but Williamson purchased the property for $210,000 with a wrap nod and two-year balloon payment. The Pogues were willing to work with the price and Williamson agreed she would accept the property in it's current condition. 


Texas First District Court of Appeals Justice Richard Hightower | txcourts.gov

Williamson and Walker moved into the house in October of 2010. Not long after, the couple discovered serious problems with it including wood rot, termite damage, and mold. The couple estimates they spent $85,116 dollars in repairs over the next three years. A brief time prior to the final balloon payment deadline, Williamson asked the Pogues for an extension, but they refused. Williamson told the Pogues of the problems she'd been having with the house, then hired an attorney who wrote a letter complaining the Pogues did not provide disclosures about the home's condition, and requested an 18-month extension.  The parties couldn't agree so Williamson filed a lawsuit. 

Williamson accused the Pogues of fraudulent-inducement, common-law-fraud, statutory fraud, negligent-misrepresentation, and Deceptive Trade Practice Act claims. The basis of her complaint was that the Pogues failed to tell her that there was wood rot, termite and water damage in the home. The Pogues filed counter claims, which they later dropped seven years later a day into trial and settled their dispute with Williamson. A week later the Pogues withdrew their consent and the case went back to trial. 

It went to trial in May of 2017. A jury returned a verdict for Williamson on all the claims, and the court granted her a total of $760,769.67. The Pogues appealed, which pointed out Williamson signed of a deed of trust which had an "as-is" clause. The Court of Appeals eventually overturned the ruling and rendered a judgement that Williamson take nothing. 

ORGANIZATIONS IN THIS STORY

More News