Legal Opinion · Dissent

Sloat v. Matheny

Colorado Court of Appeals

Decided April 7, 1980No. 78-1135Published

1DissentSternberg, Judge

Because I perceive no reason to carve out an exception to the doctrine of implied warranties of a builder-vendor, and because I believe that such an exception creates undue difficulties in application of the doctrine, I dissent.

Colorado is recognized as a leader in the development of the implied warranty rule. Note, The Doctrine of Caveat Emptor as Applied To Both The Leasing & Sale Of Real Property: The Need For Reappraisal & Reform, 2 Rutgers-Camden L.J. 120 (1970); Tavares v. Horstman, 542 P.2d 1275 (Wyo.1975). Until the 1950’s one who built and sold a home was protected by the doctrine of…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. ELDERKIN Et Ux. v. GasterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  2. Carpenter v. DonohoeSupreme Court of Colorado · 1964
  3. Tavares v. HorstmanWyoming Supreme Court · 1975
  4. Duncan v. Schuster-Graham Homes, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1978
  5. Yepsen v. BurgessOregon Supreme Court · 1974

8 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