Public records prevent lawsuit

      In 1968, James bought the Riverview Mobile Home Park, a property that has been burdened, since 1942, with an easement for ingress, egress and pipeline purposes to Chevron Oil Co.
      Three years after James purchased the mobile home park, Chevron notified him to remove five mobile homes that encroached on top of the easement so the company could work on its pipeline. After the work was completed, James replaced the mobile homes on concrete foundations in their original spaces above the pipeline.
      When James advertised his mobile home park for sale in 1980, he did not inform the real estate agent who handled the sale about the pipeline easement or his 1971 temporary removal of the five mobile homes. The agent told the buyers, Ted and Alice, the park has 44 "approved" mobile home spaces. That was true, although five of them were on top of the pipeline.
      The purchase offer from Ted and Alice, which James accepted, says title is to be "free of ... easements ... other than those of record." The sale closed in April 1981. At that time, Ted and Alice read the title report, interpreting the easement to mean Chevron had the right to enter and travel across the property.
      In January 1993, Chevron notified Ted and Alice that the five mobile homes encroaching on the easement had to be removed to allow access to the pipeline. They complied, but then sued James for fraud and misrepresentation, alleging he did not disclose that five spaces were on top of the pipeline, nor did he disclose their 1971 temporary removal.
      The judge ruled that James is not liable for damages linked to the pipeline easement.
      There was no misrepresentation or fraud, the judge explained, since the mobile home park does indeed have 44 county-approved spaces and the recorded pipeline easement was ascertainable from public records.
      The sales contract clearly specified Ted and Alice agreed to take title subject to easements of record, thus satisfying the seller's disclosure duty, the judge emphasized. A seller has a duty to disclose facts that materially affect the value or desirability of property but are known or accessible only to the seller, the judge noted. The pipeline easement is different because it was disclosed in the title report and its recording gave constructive notice to Ted and Alice.
      Based on the 1998 California Court of Appeal decision in Stevenson v. Baum, 75 Cal.Rptr.2d 904.