Legal Opinion

Yepsen v. Burgess

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided September 6, 1974PublishedCited by 62 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

O’CONNELL C. J.

Plaintiffs, purchasers of a new house built and sold to them by defendants, bring this action to recover damages allegedly incurred as the result of defendants’ breach of an implied warranty that the structure had been built in a proper and reasonably workmanlike manner and was fit for habitation. The trial court sustained defendants’ demurrer to the complaint and plaintiffs appeal.

According to plaintiffs’ complaint, defendant Sylvester Burgess is a “builder engaged in the occupation of building new homes.” It is alleged that on or about May 8,1972, defendants sold to…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Schipper v. Levitt & Sons, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1965
  2. Humber v. MortonTexas Supreme Court · 1968
  3. ELDERKIN Et Ux. v. GasterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  4. Carpenter v. DonohoeSupreme Court of Colorado · 1964
  5. Bethlahmy v. BechtelIdaho Supreme Court · 1966

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by62 opinions

  1. Redarowicz v. OhlendorfIllinois Supreme Court · 1982
  2. ATHERTON CONDO APARTMENT-OWNERS ASS'N BD OF DIRECTORS v. Blume Dev. Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1990
  3. Petersen v. Hubschman Construction Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1979
  4. Scribner v. O'Brien, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1975
  5. Davencourt at Pilgrims Landing Homeowners Ass'n v. Davencourt at Pilgrims Landing, LCUtah Supreme Court · 2009

57 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