Final answer:
The court case of Easton v. Strassburger expanded the requirement for disclosure of all known material facts regarding the property's physical condition, leading to more transparency in real estate transactions and better buyer protection. Option C is correct.
Step-by-step explanation:
The court case of Easton v. Strassburger expanded the requirement for disclosure of all known material facts regarding the physical condition of the property. This landmark decision emphasized the importance of honesty and openness in real estate transactions, underscoring the seller's obligation to disclose any information that could affect the value or desirability of the property. Prior to this ruling, sellers might not have felt compelled to divulge certain defects or issues, potentially misleading buyers. The case stressed that a failure to disclose such material facts could lead to legal liability.
Through this expansion of disclosure requirements, real estate transactions became more transparent, thereby protecting buyers against hidden defects and contributing to a fairer market. It encouraged thorough inspections and more informed decisions by purchasers. This change was a part of a larger movement towards ensuring fairness and combating discriminatory practices in housing.