Opinion ID: 883838
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: fraud & deceit

Text: Owens' claim for fraud and deceit is based upon the alleged failure of the Baches to disclose the existence of their easement. This claim is similar to the estoppel claim, and fails, as a matter of law, for the same reason. The Warranty Deed and the Contract for Deed both reference COS No. 1657, and at the time of closing, the Baches' easement was of record. As a result, Owens had constructive notice of the easement by operation of law. The Baches had no affirmative duty to disclose that which was, by virtue of the conveyancing documents, of public record. Owens cannot now assert that the existence of the easement was a fact which was fraudulently and deceitfully suppressed by the Baches.