LEONARD A. RADLAUER
REMAX AND PAT CURTIS
FROM CIVIL DISTRICT COURT, ORLEANS PARISH NO. 2006-11090,
DIVISION "D" Honorable Nakisha Ervin-Knott, JUDGE
M. Robin Zachary D. Rhodes Catherine M. Robin LAW OFFICE OF
JOHN M. ROBIN COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT
Timothy S. Madden Diana J. Masters KING & JURGENS, LLC
COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLEE
composed of Judge Edwin A. Lombard, Judge Joy Cossich
Lobrano, Judge Sandra Cabrina Jenkins
A. Lombard, Judge
Appellant, Sally Owens Radlauer,  seeks review of the January
2, 2019 judgment of the district court granting the motion
for summary judgment of the Appellee, Dr. Stephen Brint.
Pursuant to our de novo review, we affirm the
judgment of the district court, finding that Dr. Brint
established that there was no genuine issue of material fact
as to whether a redhibitory defect existed on the Property at
AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
1999, Dr. Brint purchased 34 Nassau Dr. ("the Property)
in Jefferson Parish from Carl J. Eberts. At the Act of Sale
in September 1999, Mr. Eberts executed a property disclosure
statement ("the 1999 Property Disclosure") which
stated that the Property sustained a "small amount of
water seepage" in May 1995. Dr. Brint signed the 1999
Property Disclosure as well, thereby acknowledging that he
was informed of the details therein.
2004, Mr. and Mrs. Radlauer, represented by ReMax real estate
agent, Pat Curtis, made an offer to Dr. Brint to purchase the
Property. Dr. Brint was represented in the real estate
negotiations by agent Peggy Hepting. On August 15, 2004, the
Radlauers and Dr. Brint executed an "Agreement to
Purchase or Sell" the Property.
to the Act of Sale, Mr. Radlauer inquired of Ms. Curtis
whether the Property had ever flooded because he was aware
that other homes in the same neighborhood sustained water
damage. Mr. Radlauer testified that Ms. Curtis informed him,
before the Act of Sale, that the Property had no history of
contested between the parties whether Dr. Brint provided the
Radlauers with the 1999 Property Disclosure and thereby
disclosed the 1995 water seepage prior to the Act of Sale.
Dr. Brint and agents Hepting and Curtis testified that Ms.
Hepting provided the 1999 Disclosure to Ms. Curtis. Ms.
Curtis testified that she provided the form to the Radlauers,
which Mrs. Radlauer denies and Mr. Radlauer denied in his
of Sale occurred on November 15, 2004. Two documents were
executed at the sale: a Property Disclosure (2004 Property
Disclosure) and an "As Is Clause" addendum. In the
2004 Property Disclosure, Dr. Brint checked "no" in
response to question 4, "Has any flooding . . . been
experienced with respect to the land?" Dr. Brint
testified that he completed the 2004 Property Disclosure form
himself, based upon his experience with the
the "As Is" addendum included a waiver of
redhibition stating that the Radlauers were not relying upon
"any representations, statements or warranties"
made by Dr. Brint or his agents regarding the condition of
the Property. The sale occurred approximately 9 months before
Hurricane Katrina. The Property sustained flood damage as a
result of Hurricane Katrina.
2006, Mr. Radlauer filed suit against Ms.
Curtis and ReMax. Mr. Radlauer thereafter filed
five supplemental and amending petitions. Dr. Brint was added
as a defendant in Mr. Radlauer's First Supplemental and
Amending Petition dated August 28, 2006, wherein Mr. Radlauer
raised claims of redhibition and sought rescission of the
sale and return of the purchase price.
August 29, 2007, in a separate proceeding in the
24th Judicial District Court of Jefferson Parish,
Regions Bank filed "Suit to Enforce Mortgage by Ordinary
Process" against the Radlauers, and a judgment of
foreclosure was rendered on or about March 25, 2008. The
Property was later sold at Sheriff's sale. Thereafter,
the parties in the instant matter filed cross motions for
summary judgment, which were denied by the district court on
June 12, 2009. Dr. Brint later re-urged his motion for
summary judgment in June 2010; however, it was continued
until he re-urged it again on September 18,
2018. In his motion for summary judgment and
supplemental memorandum in support thereof, Dr. Brint raised
1. Mr. Radlauer was made aware of the fact that the property
at issue experienced a small amount of water seepage in May
1995. Notwithstanding this knowledge, Mr. Radlauer still
decided to purchase the subject property;
2. Dr. Brint did not mislead Mr. Radlauer in any way; rather,
he properly disclosed all facts within his knowledge
regarding the property prior to ...