Frickel v. Sunnyside Enterprises, Inc.
Washington Supreme Court
1DissentPearson, J.
(dissenting) — The majority holds that the warranty of habitability does not apply to the Frickel-Sunnyside transaction, apparently because (1) the apartment complex was not built for resale, (2) the buyers were seeking a commercial investment, and (3) they failed to seek expert advice to determine the existence of structural deficiencies. Regardless, according to the majority, any potential warranty liability was effectively disclaimed by contractual disclaimer. I must dissent.
Introduction
This court previously has recognized only one of the three reasons offered by the majority to justify…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Oates v. Jag, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
- Petersen v. Hubschman Construction Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1979
- Carpenter v. DonohoeSupreme Court of Colorado · 1964
- Barnes v. Mac Brown and Company, Inc.Indiana Supreme Court · 1976
- McDonald v. MianeckiSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1979
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.