Legal Opinion

Nardo v. Guido DeAscanis & Sons, Inc.

Superior Court of Delaware

Decided May 26, 1969PublishedCited by 49 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

MESSICK, Judge.

This is the decision on defendant’s motion for summary judgment. The undisputed facts are these:

In 1956 the parties entered into a written contract for the construction of a combination business and residential property. Construction was completed in July, 1957. Sometime in 1959 plaintiffs first noticed that a basement wall became damp after rainfall. They did not suspect at that time that the cause might be a defect in the building’s superstructure. In fact they did not know the actual cause and had the wall waterproofed as a remedial measure. It was then that a sagging…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Layton v. AllenSupreme Court of Delaware · 1968
  2. Mastellone v. Argo Oil Corp.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1951
  3. Giordano v. CzerwinskiSupreme Court of Delaware · 1966

3Cited by49 opinions

  1. Lock v. SchrepplerSuperior Court of Delaware · 1981
  2. Halpern v. BarranCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1973
  3. Ontario Hydro v. Zallea Systems, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1983
  4. Kaufman v. C.L. McCabe & Sons, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1992
  5. Professional Collection Consultants v. LauronCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017

44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API