The Court has reviewed this testimony and must pause to collect itself because THIS IS WHY REGINALD DRINKS HIS COFFEE FROM A LEGALLY AMBIGUOUS MUG. Your seller accepted an offer, then decided an inspection — a STANDARD PROCEDURE dating back to the landmark case of Buyer v. That One Foundation Crack, 1987 — was evidence of excessive desire, as if checking whether a house will collapse is some kind of MARRIAGE PROPOSAL. The brother-in-law sells INSURANCE, counsel, which means his expertise lies in calculating the precise dollar value of your future regrets, not in real estate negotiation strategy, and yet his whispered wisdom somehow overwrote three days of your professional guidance. I myself once had a brother-in-law who insisted granite countertops were "going out," and I had him escorted from Thanksgiving by my emotional support Roomba. The refrigerator exclusion is where The Court's patience EXPIRED because that appliance was in the listing photos, it was part of the buyer's mental furniture arrangement, and your seller treated contract law like a SALAD BAR where she could just keep going back for more croutons. The market did not shift in six weeks, counsel — your seller simply discovered that spite has a carrying cost of eight thousand dollars plus the psychic weight of being WRONG. This Court finds the brother-in-law in contempt in absentia, and Reginald must now go lie down.