Beall v. Inskip
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Adams County
1Opinion of the Court
KUHN, J.,
The sole issue remaining from defendant’s preliminary objections is a demurrer to count IV concerning whether a reconditioner-vendor impliedly warrants a residence he reconditions to be habitable. Taking the allegations of the complaint as true, it appears that on December 6, 1985, defendant, a licensed real estate broker who purchases, reconditions, and resells real estate, purchased lot no. 160, section A, Chamita, from the Farmers Home Administration. The real estate was improved with a residence which defendant, by terms of the deed, was required to make “structurally sound and…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- ELDERKIN Et Ux. v. GasterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
- Licciardi v. PascarellaNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1983
3Cited by1 opinion
- Conway v. Cutler Group, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2012