This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Ingaharro (P) purchased a house from D. The agreement contained a merger clause stating that all representations were expressed in writing. The writing made no reference to the water supply. D had experienced problems with water supply, and all the neighbors in the surrounding area also experienced problems. D made no statements regarding water supply to P. P observed a swimming pool in the yard and also that the toilets had not been flushed but made no inquiry regarding sources of water. P took possession, and the water supply failed. The problem could not be fixed. P sued D for negligence misrepresentation. The trial master determined that the water supply was not readily discoverable by P and as such D made a negligent misrepresentation. The Superior Court agreed, and D appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.