Section 1941

Citation: Section 1941
Parent Document: Knight v. Hallsthammar, 623 P.2d 268 (1981)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 1981-02-13
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1241155/knight-v-hallsthammar/ ↗

Full Text

688 chars

In any event, it would be inequitable to permit the tenant to continue occupying the premises for months or perhaps years paying rent without complaint and then seek to recover that rent on the basis of breach of the implied warranty. (Cal.U. Com. Code, § 2607, subd. (3); Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc. (1963) 59 Cal.2d 57, 61 [27 Cal.Rptr. 697, 377 P.2d 897, 13 A.L.R.3d 1049].) In addition, in many cases the cost of repair would be minor whereas the impairment of use would be substantial. Clearly, it would be inequitable to permit the tenant to remain on the premises paying rent without complaint and then recover substantial rent on the basis of breach of implied warranty.

Other Sections in This Document (192)

Full Text