Legal Opinion
Cook v. Salishan Properties, Inc.
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided September 13, 1977No. 398-143, SC 24621PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHolman, J.
This is an action for damages to recover the diminution in value of a seaside house and lot. Plaintiffs appeal from a judgment for defendants after a jury trial.
In Yepsen v. Burgess, 269 Or 635, 525 P2d 1019 (1974), we held that a warranty of workmanlike construction and fitness for habitation was implied in the sale of a new house by a builder-vendor. In Yepsen we said that the "more precise definition of the scope of this warranty must await delineation on a case by case basis.” 269 Or at 641. The plaintiffs in the present case contend that a similar warranty of fitness for use should be…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1963
- Yepsen v. BurgessOregon Supreme Court · 1974
- Markle v. Mulholland's, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1973
- Redfield v. Mead, Johnson & CompanyOregon Supreme Court · 1973
- Hinson v. JeffersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Philadelphia Electric Company v. Hercules, Inc. And Gould, Inc. Appeal of Hercules, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1985
- Conklin v. HurleySupreme Court of Florida · 1983
- Rusch v. Lincoln-Devore Testing Laboratory, Inc.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1984
- Rosauer Corporation v. Sapp Development, L.L.C. Todd Sapp Whispering Creek, L.L.C. And W.C. Development, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2014
- Beri, Inc. v. Salishan Properties, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1978
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.