Summary Judgment Affirmed On Fraud Causes Of Action.

Cross-complainant purchased Blackacre. After close of escrow, the owners of the adjacent property, Whiteacre, claimed easement rights across Blackacre and sued to quiet title. The dispute concerned the use of a paved driveway between two commercial properties which had been openly and notoriously used by Whiteacre for years. The owner of Blackacre cross-complained for concealment/suppression of facts and intentional misrepresentation. The owners of Whiteacre moved for summary judgment on the fraud causes of action in the cross-complaint. In opposition to the motion for summary judgment, the owner of Blackacre submitted evidence that, when he observed and complained about Whiteacre’s vehicles crossing Blackacre, one of the owners of Whiteacre responded, “I’ll take care of it,” and he assumed it had ceased. The trial court granted summary judgment and the owner of Blackacre appealed. The appellate court affirmed the grant of summary judgment, stating: “We conclude there was no error. The concealment/suppression of facts claim fails because of the absence of evidence supporting all of the requisite elements of that claim. Two elements of the claim not present were (1) a duty on the part of [Whiteacre] to disclose that it claimed prescriptive easement rights; and (2) the [owner of Blackacre’s] justifiable reliance on the facts as they understood them without such disclosure (i.e., their understanding that there were no adverse claims against the [Blackacre] by the owners of the adjacent property). The intentional misrepresentation claim likewise fails because of the absence of evidence that [the owner of Blackacre] justifiably relied on [Whiteacre’s] alleged implicit representation that it did not claim any easement rights over the [Blackacre] property.”  (Hoffman v. 162 North Wolfe LLC (Cal. App. Sixth Dist.; August 13, 2014) 228 Cal.App.4th 1178, [175 Cal.Rptr.3d 820].)