Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Citation
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Parent Document
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Jurisdiction
- Washington (state)
- Effective Date
- 1973-10-25
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1452046/foisy-v-wyman/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (140)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Foisy v. Wyman, 515 P.2d 160 (1973)
- Sec. 6
- Sec. 6
- Sec. 6
- Sec. 6
- Sec. 6
- Sec. 6
- Sec. 6
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 6
- Sec. 6
- Sec. 6
- Sec. 6
- Sec. 6
- Sec. 6
- Sec. 6
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
- Sec. 8
Full Text
951 charsIt can be argued, however, that the defendant should not be entitled to the protection of an implied warranty of habitability since he knew of a substantial number of defects when he rented the premises and the rent was reduced from $87 per month to $50 per month. We believe this type of bargaining by the landlord with the tenant is contrary to public policy and the purpose of the doctrine of implied warranty of habitability. A disadvantaged tenant should not be placed in a position of agreeing to live in an uninhabitable premises. Housing conditions, such as the record indicates exist in the instant case, are a health hazard, not only to the individual tenant, but to the community which is exposed to said individual. As the court recognized in Pines v. Perssion, supra, such housing conditions are at least a contributing cause of such problems as urban blight, juvenile delinquency and high property taxes for the conscientious landowners.