Court Opinion

ID: 9522455
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 02:25:56.203151+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:02:50.023104
License: Public Domain

HOLLY M. KIRBY, J.,
filed a concurring opinion.
I concur in the majority opinion in this case, but write separately to emphasize that the Court’s interpretation of the term “shown” in the Agreement is limited to the facts and the proof in this case. Given the evolving importance in the real estate market of the realtor’s online presentation of property and the fact that properties are sometimes purchased by buyers who never view the property in person, with different proof, the term “shown” could be given a more expansive interpretation. However, with the proof submitted to the trial court and no contractual definition of the term “shown,” I agree with the majority’s result and reasoning.