We are not pessimistic. YOU are overconfident. Make sure you take a dose of humility into court if you don't want to look like a fool.
I don't think the OP fully understands the reasoning behind what was a case of first impression. He should also read the Supreme Court case the court relied on. It is a far more subtle and complex issue than the OP seems to let on. Also, I'm uncertain how "damages" are being measured by the OP. The inspection did not guarantee the entire house was correctly built. To me, it seems the case belongs against the seller who did not disclose the water problem.
Florida Power & Light Co. v. Mid-Valley, Inc., 763 F.2d 1316 (11th Cir. 1985)
L. Luria & Son, Inc. v. Honeywell, Inc., 460 So. 2d 521 (4th Dist. 1984)
Rollins, Inc. v. Heller, 454 So. 2d 580 (3rd Dist. 1984)
I am coming in late to this thread but my take is that the home inspector may be held liable notwithstanding the limit of liability clause in the contract.
A claim should be filed and let the E&O insurance carrier come to the table and deal.
A few more thoughts. First. Even though I believe I will prevail, I will not go into court and act over confident. Here in Florida, small claims automatically go to a mediator. Keep in mind that the house inspector has tacitly admitted his error by refunding my payment to him. I kept the check and will bring it to court.
The reason I feel confident is that I am a close friend of a full partner in a major Chicago law firm. This person does a ton of litigation and is what I would call wildly successful and at the pinnacle of their career. I hesitated to impose on our friendship, but I did. This person's response was very positive. This senior attorney did not say that the out of state cases were of no value to my situation. In fact they said they believe the case will go in my favor.
But we shall see. On any given day**************..
how can you prove the door was installed backwards? I have seen French doors installed opening in and opening out. Unless there is something specific that would jump out at an inspector indicating the door was installed backwards, I have my concerns about you prevailing.
just why is the door leaking and simply saying it is installed backwards is not a reason and how was it determined the door is installed backwards?
So all you naysayers can go jump in the lake. I won.
You confuse naysayers with people trying to assist and play devil's advocate. Often times, winning is contingent on overcoming doubts and objections. Having an educated sounding board, assists posters to develop those answers. Going through small claims allows more flexibility in rulings and determinations than would be found in normal court cases. On behalf of the primary contributing members... "Your welcome, glad you won".
I didn't see one iota of anyone playing "devil's advocate." What I did see was a lot of presumptive -- I am smarter than you attitudes.
You said: "....Having an educated sounding board....." Give me a break. Not one of you offered anything constructive. I sensed the attitude of watch out, you are gonna go down in flames.
You said: "On behalf of the primary contributing members...."Your welcome, glad you won".
If you mean contributing members in that they contributed to helping me out. NOT.
Oh, and by the way. "Your welcome" is correctly spelled "you're welcome."
Unlike Arnold, I won't be back.
Oddly enough, in all my time here, I can recall about two cases where someone came back and admitted they lost. The other 99.998% all claim to have won. That's a better winning percentage than every lawyer I know.
Originally Posted by Tranquility
To be fair, the ones who lose usually don't bother to come back at all.