Pennsylvania Supreme Court to Review Ability of Subsequent Buyers to Claim Breach of Implied Warranty Against Construction Contractor
In Conway v. Cutler Group, Inc., 57 A.3d 155 (Pa. Super 2012), the Pennsylvania Superior Court held for the first time that a subsequent buyer of a home, who has no contractual privity with the contractor, can nonetheless assert claims against the contractor for beach of the implied warranty of habitability. The Superior Court found that the implied warranty is a creature of public policy, and accordingly no privity of contract is necessary. In response to concerns that such extension of the implied warranty beyond the initial purchaser to second or subsequent purchasers would lead to unlimited liability against contractors, the court found that any such claims would still be subject to the 12 year statute of repose set forth in 42 Pa.C.S.A. Section 5536(a), which is applicable to all proceedings involving the design, planning, supervision, or observation of construction, or construction of any improvement to real property
One must wonder whether such an extension of the implied warranty of habitability to subsequent purchasers sets the ground work for the extension of additional implied warranties against contractors and builders, such as the implied warranties of fitness for purpose, merchantability, workmanlike quality or title
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has granted a Petition for Allowance of Appeal to decide the sole issue of whether the Superior Court wrongly decide an important question of first impression in Pennsylvania when it held that any subsequent purchaser of a used residence may recover contract damages for breach of the builder’s implied warranty of habitability to new home purchasers? Conway v. Cutler Group, 77 A.3d 1257 (2013).
The litigation attorneys at Houston Harbaugh, P.C., are accomplished business trial lawyers, providing comprehensive support in litigation across a broad spectrum of matters throughout Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio and other jurisdictions upon a special admission basis. Our clients are regional and national small, medium and large companies and individuals who seek well planned and aggressive, but cost effective litigation. We counsel, we budget, we have a deep bench, we act quickly when needed and we have experienced trial lawyers who know the courts and bench. We serve regularly as local counsel for some of the largest law firms in the country when they have matters in this region.
Henry M. Sneath - Practice Chair
Co-Chair of Houston Harbaugh’s Litigation Practice, and Chair of its Intellectual Property Practice, Henry Sneath is a trial attorney, mediator, arbitrator and Federal Court Approved Mediation Neutral and Special Master with extensive federal and state court trial experience in cases involving commercial disputes, breach of contract litigation, intellectual property matters, patent, trademark and copyright infringement, trade secret misappropriation, DTSA claims, cyber security and data breach prevention, mitigation and litigation, probate trusts and estates litigation, construction claims, eminent domain, professional negligence lawsuits, pharmaceutical, products liability and catastrophic injury litigation, insurance coverage, and insurance bad faith claims.
Samuel H. Simon - Practice Chair
As co-chair of Houston Harbaugh’s Litigation Group, Sam focuses his practice on commercial/business litigation. Sam regularly represents clients in the construction, manufacturing, oil and gas, and wholesale/retail/ distribution industries, as well as individuals in matters such as:
- Construction litigation
- Environmental litigation
- Breach of contract disputes
- Oil and gas litigation
- Restrictive covenants (non-compete agreements)
- Civil rights
- Collections/creditors’ rights
- Lease disputes