If a buyer were to sue a broker for failing to properly inspect a house and disclose material facts, which case would she reference?

The correct reference for a buyer suing a broker for failing to properly inspect a house and disclose material facts would be the case of Easton v. Strassburger. This case is significant in real estate law as it established the duty of care that brokers owe to buyers regarding the disclosure of material facts about a property. In this landmark decision, the California court ruled that real estate agents are required to conduct a reasonably competent and diligent visual inspection of the property and disclose any material facts they discover during that inspection.

This case is pivotal in defining the responsibilities of brokers relating to property inspections and disclosures, reinforcing the principle that brokers must protect buyers from potential issues that could affect their decision to purchase a property. The implications of this case highlight the broker's obligation to be thorough and transparent, ensuring that buyers are fully informed about the properties they are considering. This legal precedent makes Easton v. Strassburger a foundational case that buyers would reference in similar lawsuits involving nondisclosure or poor inspections by brokers.