Lian v. Stalick, 25 P.3d 467 (2001)

Citation: Lian v. Stalick, 25 P.3d 467 (2001)
Parent Document: Lian v. Stalick, 25 P.3d 467 (2001)
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Effective Date: 2001-06-19
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2587519/lian-v-stalick/ ↗

Full Text

1,041 chars

Relying on Stuart v. Coldwell Banker Commercial Group, Inc., 109 Wash.2d 406, 415-16, 745 P.2d 1284 (1987), Mr. Stalick further contends the warranty of habitability does not apply to defects in exterior nonstructural elements adjacent to the dwelling. But Stuart does not offer the support Mr. Stalick seeks. In Stuart, the representatives of condominium owners brought suit against the owner-developer-builder-vendor of the complex for various construction defects affecting decks and access walkways. Id. at 410-11, 745 P.2d 1284. Regarding the access walkways, the Supreme Court reasoned "one could plausibly argue that the defects occurred in an essential portion of the dwelling itself." Id. at 417, 745 P.2d 1284. "Such a defect could be said to render a home unit unfit for its intended purpose." Id. The Stuart court remanded the matter so the trial court could determine "which units owned by such plaintiffs had walkways so impaired that the sole means of access to the unit was dangerous to negotiate." Id. at 422, 745 P.2d 1284.

Other Sections in This Document (107)

Full Text