Legal Opinion
Copland v. Nathaniel
New York Supreme Court
Decided February 1, 1995PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Joan B. Lefkowitz, J.
This case raises very interesting questions concerning application of caveat emptor to the sale of real property that had previously been subjected to chlordane application.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
In June 1973 the subject real property, on which is located a one-family residence, was treated for termites, presumably by application of chlordane. A 10-year guaranty to the homeowner was issued by the termite company, Central Termite Control, which was assigned by the homeowner (Elizabeth Gutterman) to the new homeowners (Drs. Vermund and Vargas) on sale of the…
2Cases cited61 opinions
- Ultramares Corp. v. ToucheNew York Court of Appeals · 1931
- Chimart Associates v. PaulNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
- Pulka v. EdelmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
- Danann Realty Corp. v. HarrisNew York Court of Appeals · 1959
- Citibank, N. A. v. PlapingerNew York Court of Appeals · 1985
56 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Estate of Ginor v. LandsbergDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1996
- Bando v. AchenbaumAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
- United States Postal Service v. Phelps Dodge Refining Corp.District Court, E.D. New York · 1997