Before you can start this discussion question, please complete the Application Based Activity (ABA) assigned in Week 3 titled You Be The Judge: UCC and Warranties (Who is Distorting What?).

In this case, the plaintiff sues the defendant for breach of contract, deceptive business practices, and violation of her First Amendment rights when the defendant theater owner showed advertisements before the start of the film. Doing so will help you answer the questions below.

After completing the ABA, answer the following prompts:

1. Reflect on the activity and summarize how you judged the case.
2. What was the underlining reason(s) for your decision to support the plaintiff or the defendant? Why or why not?
3. Share what (if any) details in the case created hesitation in your decisions? Explain why.
4. Choose one of your peers and for the sake of argument (respectfully) challenge their judgement on the case. Support your assertion/position using legal references when possible.

Reference case: ******

Issue

Leticia Easton brought a negligence action against Mr. Strassburger, a real estate broker, after a "massive earth movement" significantly reduced the value of her home from $170,000 to $20,000 shortly after the land was purchased. Strassburger's agents had noticed possible soil problems but made no further inquiry or investigation regarding the issue.

Decision

The Court ruled that the defendant had an affirmative duty to conduct a reasonably competent and diligent inspection of the property and to disclose to prospective purchasers all facts materially affecting the value or desirability of the property that such an investigation would reveal. This agent never fulfilled his duty, and his company was liable.

Significance

After this case, brokers had to give closer inspection to the property.