Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Real Estate Marketing, Inc. v. Franz, 885 S.W.2d 921 (1994)

Citation
Real Estate Marketing, Inc. v. Franz, 885 S.W.2d 921 (1994)
Parent Document
Real Estate Marketing, Inc. v. Franz, 885 S.W.2d 921 (1994)
Jurisdiction
Kentucky (state)
Effective Date
1994-10-27

Other Sections in This Document (62)

Full Text

1,244 chars
As stated, the New Hampshire case, Lempke v. Dagenais, supra, is cited extensively and with approval in the Court of Appeals’ Opinion. It recognizes an implied warranty of habitability under New Hampshire law from the builder/seller to subsequent purchasers from the original buyer in limited circumstances. It provides an excellent review of those cases from other jurisdictions and authoritative treatises which ad*926dress the problem. It recognizes that such warranty, strictly speaking, is not a contractual undertaking but an obligation “imposed by operation of law” as “a matter of public policy.” 547 A.2d at 292. While we agree that Lempke v. Dagenais is a carefully written and well reasoned opinion, we also recognize that the results reached in that opinion follow in significant part from a broad view of public policy regarding warranties in New Hampshire which the Supreme Court of New Hampshire gleans from the “New Hampshire adoption of U.C.C. Alternative C which abolishes privity in implied warranty suits.” 547 A.2d at 294. While the U.C.C. (the Uniform Commercial Code) does not apply, as such, to selling a home, the New Hampshire version of the U.C.C. at least provides a source from which to extrapolate a public policy.