Legal Opinion
Lemle v. Breeden
Hawaii Supreme Court
Decided November 26, 1969No. 4772PublishedCited by 105 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT BY
LEVINSON, J.
This case of first impression in Hawaii involves-the doctrine of implied warranty of habitability and fitness for use of a-leased dwelling. The plaintiff-lessee (Lemle) sued to recover the deposit and rent payment totalling $1,190.00. Constructive eviction and breach of an implied warranty of hábitability and fitness for use were alléged as the basis for recovery. The defendant-lessor (Mrs. Breeden) counterclaimed for damages for breach of the rental agreement. The trial court, sitting without a jury, held for the plaintiff and the case comes to us on appeal…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Escola v. Coca Cola Bottling Co.California Supreme Court · 1944
- Schipper v. Levitt & Sons, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1965
- Humber v. MortonTexas Supreme Court · 1968
- Carpenter v. DonohoeSupreme Court of Colorado · 1964
- Reste Realty Corporation v. CooperSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1969
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by105 opinions
- Commonwealth v. Monumental Properties, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
- Green v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
- Marini v. IrelandSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1970
- Pugh v. HolmesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
- Boston Housing Authority v. HemingwayMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1973
100 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.