Court Opinion

ID: 9576532
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 21:25:37.713127+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:09:26.297333
License: Public Domain

Marshall, J.,
dissenting as to Division 4.
I cannot agree with the majority in the holding in Division 4 of the opinion.
Since the house was under construction and new, the appellees had an equal opportunity to inspect and uncover latent defects. Indeed, Mr. Perren’s occupation was a form of home repair work! A careful examination of the transcript reveals no specific latent defects in appellees’ testimony. The list of defects included in paragraph 13 of the original complaint is, in effect, a "punch list” of the defects which are normally corrected by the builder before the building is accepted by the purchaser. No fraud is evidenced.
I therefore respectfully dissent.
I am authorized to state that Presiding Justice Undercofler and Justice Bowles join in this dissent.