Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Meadowbrook Condominium Ass'n v. South Burlington Realty Corp., 565 A.2d 238 (1989)

Citation
Meadowbrook Condominium Ass'n v. South Burlington Realty Corp., 565 A.2d 238 (1989)
Parent Document
Meadowbrook Condominium Ass'n v. South Burlington Realty Corp., 565 A.2d 238 (1989)
Jurisdiction
Vermont (state)
Effective Date
1989-06-23

Other Sections in This Document (98)

Full Text

840 chars
In Rothberg v. Olenik, 128 Vt. 295, 262 A.2d 461 (1970), this Court first considered a claim that, in selling a newly constructed house, the builder/vendor implicitly warrants to the buyer that the house is built in a good and workmanlike manner and is suitable for habitation. After an exhaustive review of caselaw from other jurisdictions, the Court rejected an argument based on the doctrine of caveat emptor and embraced the implied warranty concept as Vermont law. Id. at 305, 262 A.2d at 467. It is important to note that, while Rothberg did not address the issue, the law will recognize an implied warranty only with respect to defects that were latent at the time of purchase. Redarowicz v. Ohlendorf, 92 Ill.2d 171, 183, 65 Ill.Dec. 411, 417, 441 N.E.2d 324, 330 (1982); Gupta v. Ritter Homes, Inc., 646 S.W.2d 168, 169 (Tex.1983).