Opinion ID: 2106725
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: trial court ruling on the merits and subsequent court orders

Text: The trial court issued a Memorandum Order in favor of the Seller on January 5, 1993, and ruled that the defects in the property were not latent because Williams knew the property contained a partially rotted roof and faulty pipes, contracted with plaintiff to have them replaced, and the replacement was subject to his inspection and approval.... Moreover, the trial court found that Williams had not made a reasonable inspection of the property after notice by the Seller that the repairs had been completed. Accordingly, the trial court concluded that Williams' unreasonable inspection and subsequent acceptance of the property constituted a waiver to any later claim by defendant regarding such defects. On January 15, 1993, the Seller filed a Super.Ct.Civ.R. 59 motion to amend the trial court's judgment. The Seller sought an amendment of the trial court's order to include, inter alia, (1) a writ of possession and an order requiring Williams to renounce any interest he has in the property, (2) a money judgment in the amount of $9,613.08 plus costs, and (3) an order turning the money in the Court Registry over to the Seller. A later trial court order, dated February 1, 1993, and docketed on February 5, 1993: (1) granted possession of the property to the Seller; (2) entered judgment for the Seller in the amount of $9,613.08, plus interest and costs; (3) ordered all monies in the Court Registry to be released to the Seller and credited against the money judgment; and (4) ordered Seller to submit an affidavit no later than February 15, 1993, setting forth attorney's fees and costs claimed, and further ordered Williams to file an opposition prior to March 1, 1993. Williams moved for injunctive relief on February 11, 1993, in an effort to vacate his eviction from the property; however, he was evicted from the property on February 9, 1993. There is no record of any ruling on his motion for injunctive relief. [10] On February 16, 1993, the Seller filed a motion to alter or amend judgment. The motion in essence requested virtually the same relief as demanded in the Seller's January 15, 1993, motion to alter or amend. The Seller asked that: (1) Williams be given no credit for the sums he paid into the Court Registry; (2) Williams be required to execute a disclaimer of interest in the property; and (3) the time for claiming attorney's fees be enlarged until two weeks after all litigation involving the case had been resolved. The record does not reflect any decision on this motion. On February 2, 1993, Williams filed suit against the Seller in the civil division of the Superior Court, alleging, inter alia, breach of contract. This action was dismissed, without prejudice, on the ground of res judicata, pending disposition of Williams' appeal to this court. Williams filed a notice of appeal on January 21, 1993.