Legal Opinion

Burelle v. Pienkofski

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided December 3, 1929PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSnow, J.

The rule that a tenant takes the premises as he finds them and that, in the absence of warranty or deceit, neither the tenant nor his invitees may recover against the landlord for injuries sustained by reason of defects therein (Towne v. Thompson, 68 N. H. 317, 319; Clark v. Sharpe, 76 N. H. 446; Marston v. Andler, 80 N. H. 564) does not apply to those portions of the premises which the landlord furnishes for the common use of his tenants and over which he retains control. Gobrecht v. Beckwith, 82 N. H. 415, 417; Saad v. Papageorge, 82 N. H. 294, 296. In such cases he has the duty to use…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Call v. HaunTennessee Supreme Court · 1850

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Hull v. Bishop-Stoddard CafeteriaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1947
  2. Marsh v. RileyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1936
  3. Lovett v. Manchester Street RailwaySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1932
  4. Gray v. DieckmannCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1940
  5. Hiller v. WileyMississippi Supreme Court · 1942

2 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