Legal Opinion

Rutledge v. Dodenhoff

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided July 8, 1970No. 19075PublishedCited by 50 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Lewis, Justice:

This is an appeal by defendants from a judgment recovered against them, as the builder-vendor of a new house, for damages sustained by plaintiff the purchaser, from overflows from a septic tank installed by defendants as a part of the new construction.

Plaintiff alleged that the overflow from the septic tank was due to either defective design or installation of the sewerage disposal system. The case was tried and the issue of liability submitted to the jury on the legal theory that the defendants, as a builder-vendor of a new house, impliedly warranted the fitness of the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Bethlahmy v. BechtelIdaho Supreme Court · 1966
  2. Waggoner v. Midwestern Development, Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Rogers v. ScyphersSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1968
  4. Patterson v. Orangeburg Fertilizer Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1921
  5. Frasher v. CoferSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1968

3Cited by50 opinions

  1. Redarowicz v. OhlendorfIllinois Supreme Court · 1982
  2. ELDERKIN Et Ux. v. GasterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  3. ABC Builders, Inc. v. PhillipsWyoming Supreme Court · 1981
  4. Kennedy v. Columbia Lumber & Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1989
  5. Davencourt at Pilgrims Landing Homeowners Ass'n v. Davencourt at Pilgrims Landing, LCUtah Supreme Court · 2009

45 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