Read the following case and write a paper about Meeting of the minds and enforceable contracts

Caption: Solorzano V. First MortgageCorporation 896 So.2D 847 (Fla.4th DCA2005)

Facts: Gavi Solorzano purchased residential real property from First Union Mortgage Corporation referred to as Wachovin. The property was sold "as is". The residential property was in violation of several material housing code violations, which Wachovia was aware of prior to the sale. Solorzane alleged that the defects were not readily observable by her at the time of the sale and materially affected the values of the property. She filed suit alleging fraudulent non-disclosure. The trial court dismissed the law suit with prejudice for failure to state a cause of action. Solorzano appealed.

Issue: Whether the trial court properly dismissed Solorzano's lawsuit for failure to state a terms of action.

Brief Answer: No.

Reasoning: The court held that Solorzano's lawsuit sufficiently stated a cause of action for fraudulent non-disclosure. The court relied on the Florida Supreme Court's case of Johnson v. Davis. 480 So.2d 625 (Fla 1985) in which the court for the first time recognized this cause of action for cases involving the sale of residential property to disclose defects in the home that are not readily observable. Which materially impacted the value of the home and of which the buyer was unaware. The court rejected Wachovia's argument that the inclusion of an "as is" clause within the sales contract supported the trial court's granting its motion to dismiss, stating that such a clause does not relieve the doty to disclose imposed by the Johnson case. The question of whether the violations were readily observable was a question of fact that could not be addressed in a motion to dismiss, in which a trial court cannot speculate whether the allegations were provable.

Reserved and Remanded:

Separate Opinion: Justice Gross concurred specifically to express concern that the holding of Johnson v. Davis, 480 So 2D 625 (Fla. 1985) not be read too narrowly. He stated the definition of a "readily observable" fact in the johnson non-disclosure case is one that is not obvious from a "cursory examination or investigation."