Ross v. Kirner

Summary

The Washington Supreme Court held that the merger doctrine does not bar a negligent misrepresentation claim arising from a real estate purchase and sale agreement. The court concluded that the evidence did not establish negligent misrepresentation as a matter of law because genuine issues of material fact remained, including reliance. It affirmed reinstatement of the claim and remanded for further proceedings, while denying attorney fees to the seller.

Holdings

1. The merger doctrine does not bar an action based on fraud or misrepresentation, including Ross's negligent misrepresentation claim.
2. The evidence did not establish as a matter of law that Kirner committed actionable negligent misrepresentation. Whether he did so presents genuine issues of material fact for trial.
3. Kirner was not entitled to attorney fees in the Supreme Court because he was not the substantially prevailing party.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the merger doctrine barred Ross's negligent misrepresentation claim based on the purchase and sale agreement and subsequent deed.
2. Whether the evidence established as a matter of law that Kirner committed actionable negligent misrepresentation.
3. Whether Kirner was entitled to attorney fees as the substantially prevailing party on review.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded