Court upholds damages to Akwa Vista

[Just Sold]

The Citizen Today:

Court upholds damages to Akwa Vista developer

The state Supreme Court has upheld a ruling that awards the developer of the Akwa Vista subdivision more than $800,000 in damages because a real estate company failed to deliver on its promise to provide buyers for some of the home lots in the upscale, gated community on Brickyard Mountain in The Weirs.

On July 23, the Supreme Court issued a slip opinion in the case of Akwa Vista, LLC v. NRT, Inc. d/b/a Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage & all,which Judge Larry Smukler heard last year in Hillsborough County Superior Court.

Full Story: http://www.fosters.com/apps/pbcs.dll...=2010707309877

[fatlazyless]

That's an interesting local Laconia real estate civil lawsuit! Don't real estate sales people usually purchase for themself an insurance policy that covers them against errors and omissions. So, it seems to me that what happened here is definately either an error or an omission or probably both, so is an insurance company very likely to pay up here?

[AC2717]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

That's an interesting local Laconia real estate civil lawsuit! Don't real estate sales people usually purchase for themself an insurance policy that covers them against errors and omissions. So, it seems to me that what happened here is definately either an error or an omission or probably both, so is an insurance company very likely to pay up here?

The E&O might not cover mis-representation or this certain act, your pricing on that policy is usually based on what type of coverage you want, or they could have looked at the policy (the plaintiff that is) and filed for everything under the sun and also coverages that were not listed and waited to see what the court would allow to stick as part of the lawsuit

This coverage is a very difficult one to understand from outside the underwriter/agent world. I think it could almost fall under professional liability. But to be honest on the insurance I work on, just because you promise something, does not mean you are covered when you do not deliver and then the insurance company will pay

[ApS]

From the article:

[NH Supreme Court Justice] Broderick said, "a reasonable juror could have reached the verdict awarded to Akwa Vista. Thus, the defendants have failed to establish that the verdict was conclusively against the weight of the evidence, and we cannot say that the trial court erred in denying the defendants' motion for remittitur."

This reasonable juror would have weighed the fact that the US had entered its worst banking disaster of modern times. (And reduced the award handed over).

Plus, whatever happened to dropping the Latin legal-eze? "
Remittitur, geez..."

[regalguy]

Had we entered this banking disaster as far back as 2004? Caldwell didn't sell a single piece of property as they had promised. They wanted exclusive rights and they got them.

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

From the article:


This reasonable juror would have weighed the fact that the US had entered its worst banking disaster of modern times. (And reduced the award handed over).

Plus, whatever happened to dropping the Latin legal-eze? "
Remittitur, geez..."