Osterhaus v. Toth, et al., 291 Kan. 759 (Kan. Sup. Ct. 2011), aff'g., 187 P.3d 126 (Kan. Ct. App. 2008)

(plaintiff, buyer of home sued defendants (seller, real estate agent and real estate agency) for problems associated with leaking basement on purchased home; allegations involved defendants' breach of the Kansas Consumer Protection Act (KCPA), fraud, negligent misrepresentation and breach of contract; trial court granted summary judgment for defendants on all claims; seller had completed and given to buyer disclosure statement that did not indicate problems with basement wall and water in basement that seller actually knew about; trial court noted that plaintiff had independent inspection performed before closing which revealed "major cracking" in basement wall; summary judgment improper simply because buyer signed buyer acknowledgment and agreement - plaintiff may have relied on the representations; "as is" and release provisions do not necessarily bar plaintiff's breach of contract claim - factual finding necessary as to whether reasonable inspection would have revealed defects in foundation that should have then been included as unacceptable conditions listed by plaintiff in form Amendment; claims for fraud and misrepresentation subject to two-year statute of limitations and issue remanded for determination of when fact of plaintiff's injury was reasonably ascertainable by plaintiff; matter remanded on KCPA issue and on whether agent breached Brokerage Relationships in Real Estate Transactions Act by not revealing known facts about the home on seller's disclosure statement).