In Brief
A widow who purchased mortgaged agricultural land at bank auction was promised 54 cents (a land measurement unit) but received only 39.60 cents, though she paid the full consideration and received a sale certificate for 54 cents. The bank argued the sale was on an 'as is where is' basis and the buyer was aware of the shortfall. The Supreme Court allowed her suit for damages, holding that a financial institution must fairly disclose material property defects despite the 'as is where is' condition. The bank's knowledge of the actual extent from a government survey before issuing the certificate for the incorrect area constituted wrongful non-disclosure, entitling the buyer to recover damages for the missing land area.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.