[§514B-94] Misleading statements and omissions; remedies.

387 words·~2 min read·/hi/514b-94

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

(a)No person may:

(1)Knowingly authorize, direct, or aid in the publication, advertisement, distribution, or circulation of any false statement or representation concerning any project offered for sale or lease; or

(2)Issue, circulate, publish, or distribute any advertisement, pamphlet, prospectus, or letter concerning a project that contains any false written statement or is misleading due to the omission of a material fact.

(b)Every sale made in violation of this section shall be voidable at the election of the purchaser; and the person making the sale and every director, officer, or agent of or for the seller, if the director, officer, or agent has personally participated or aided in any way in making the sale, shall be jointly and severally liable to the purchaser in an action in any court of competent jurisdiction upon tender of the units sold or of the contract made, for the full amount paid by the purchaser, with interest, together with all taxable court costs and reasonable attorneys' fees; provided that no action shall be brought for the recovery of the purchase price after two years from the date of the sale; and provided further that no purchaser otherwise entitled shall claim or have the benefit of this section who has refused or failed to accept within thirty days an offer in writing of the seller to take back the unit in question and to refund the full amount paid by the purchaser, together with interest at six per cent on the amount for the period from the date of payment by the purchaser down to the date of repayment. [L 2005, c 93, pt of §4]

Case Notes

District court predicted that the state supreme court would hold that the two-year period in subsection

(b)is a statute of repose, rather than a statute of limitations, with respect to an action where plaintiff claimed, among other things, a violation of the condominium property act by defendants that allegedly promised that guests of condominium owners would be able to use the resort's facilities without additional fees. Plaintiff failed to bring a Chapter 514B claim within two years after the purchase of the condominium, and because statutes of repose are not subject to equitable tolling, plaintiff's claim was time-barred. 371 F. Supp. 3d 803 (2019).