specifically set out on Husband’s inventory or otherwise referred to herein.” Further, the M.S.A. contains a full disclosure provision: “Each party represents that they have made a fair and reasonable disclosure to the other of the property and financial obligations known to them.” These provisions show that the parties intended to divide all of their marital property via the M.S.A. only after a full disclosure of what that property consisted of. Where a person is under a duty to disclose material information, refrains from doing so, and thereby leads another to contract in reliance on a mistak en understanding of the facts, the resulting contract is subject to rescission due to the intentional nondisclosure. See Smith v. Nat’l Resort Communities, Inc., 585 S.W.2d 655, 658 (Tex.1979) (<HOLDING>). A duty to speak arises from a fiduciary or
holding that a person who obtains drugs from a seller is not an accomplice of the seller holding that the seller had no noncontractual duty to disclose water damage to armslength buyers of residential real estate recognizing that most other jurisdictions have held that to qualify as a lost volume seller under section 27082 the seller needs to show only that it could have supplied both the breaching purchaser and the resale purchaser holding that under mississippi law a purchaser is a bona fide purchaser for value without notice unless there is actual notice or circumstances which would put a purchaser on inquiry notice holding that purchaser could rescind contract where seller failed to disclose a fact  the flooding of the subject real estate  that seller knew purchaser would regard as material