Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Citation
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Parent Document
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Jurisdiction
- Washington (state)
- Effective Date
- 2005-06-14
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4939487/pruitt-v-savage/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (33)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
- Pruitt v. Savage, 128 Wash. App. 327 (2005)
Full Text
568 chars¶18 Although this section recommends extending the warranty to third persons other than the tenant, it has not been adopted in this state.13 Neither party cites or discusses the authorities, if any, on which it is based. Neither party identifies or discusses any of the competing policy considerations that should be considered and addressed when deciding whether to extend the warranty of habitability to third persons other than the tenant. Given this paucity of briefing on what might be a significant question, we decline to address that question in this case. Ill