Court Opinion

ID: 9744044
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 21:52:33.355386+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:46.358904
License: Public Domain

RATLIFF, Chief Judge,
dissenting.
Insofar as the majority opinion fails to bar the Sheridans from recovery based upon the release provision of the purchase agreement, I must dissent.
The language of the provision is unambiguous and releases Callander from all liability arising out of defects in the premises. At the time the purchase agreement was entered into no public policy prevented the parties in the present case from agreeing to release Callander from liability arising out of even latent defects. See Lechner v. Reutepohler (1989), Ind.App., 545 N.E.2d 1144, 1148 (an identical release provision held to be unambiguous and to bar the homeowners’ recovery against the builder-vendor for defects in the foundation of the home.)