ABSTRACT
The doctrine of caveat emptor is a remnant of Ancient Roman practices that still lingers in the practice of modern real estate law. However, a series of cases in the 1980s revealed the antiquated nature of such a doctrine by demonstrating that the doctrine no longer reflects societal needs. Specifically, caveat emptor does not address the issues surrounding stigmatized properties as they are considered too subjective for the court to consider. The real effects new homeowners experience from these stigmas are not, however, subjective. Instead, caveat emptor gives sellers the ability to transfer a defective title and defective property rights to unsuspecting buyers as caveat emptor protects sellers from liabilities stemming from the nondisclosure of stigmas. This Comment argues that states should impose disclosure requirements that meet the needs of their constituents. The ability to afford a house in this economy has become increasingly scarce due to inflated property price tags; therefore, states should implement requirements that force sellers to inform buyers of what they are really buying. By continuing to use caveat emptor, courts are attempting to avoid litigation, but they are also indirectly impeding homeowner’s ability to use and enjoy their new land.
Murphree, Elizabeth, Let the Sellers Beware: The Death of Caveat Emptor Could be Trending (January 19, 2025).
Leave a Reply