Forest City Stapleton Inc. v. Rogers
Citations
- 2017 CO 23
- 393 P.3d 487
- 2017 WL 1377345
- 2017 Colo. LEXIS 281
Syllabus
Implied Warranty of Suitability—Privity of Contract—Implied Warranties. The Supreme Court considered whether privity of contract is necessary for a home buyer to assert a claim for breach of the implied warranty of suitability against a developer. The Court concluded that because breach of the implied warranty of suitability is a contract claim, privity of contract is required in such a case. Here, the home buyer was not in privity of contract with the developer and thus cannot pursue a claim against the developer for breach of the implied warranty of suitability. Accordingly, the Court of Appeals' judgment was reversed and the case was remanded for further proceedings.
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- explaining the principle of “privity of contract,” which “requires that one must be a party to the contract to enforce a term in the contract or an implied warranty arising out of the contract”
- “Privity of contract between parties has long been a touchstone of contract causes of action”
- “[C]ontract claims require different proof than tort claims and should be treated separately.” (citation omitted)
- “Stated simply, privity of contract requires that one must be a party to the contract to enforce a term in the contract . . . .”
- “Privity of contract between parties has long been a touchstone of contract causes of action. Stated simply, privity of contract requires that one must be a party to the contract to enforce a term in the contract or an implied warranty arising out of the contract.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Rice
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
4 cases in this archive cite this case.
- In re Myford Touch Consumer Litig.N.D. California· 2018-02-14· cited 31×
- Bewley v. SemlerSupreme Court of Colorado· 2018-09-24· cited 26×
- e Village Homeowners Ass'n, Inc. v. Brooktree Village, LLCColorado Court of Appeals· 2020-11-19· cited 17×
- Lucas v. Eclipse Cos., L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2023-12-18· cited 1×
Cites
13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Town of Alma v. AZCO Construction, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado· 2000-09-18· cited 726×
- Beeftu v. Creekside Ventures LLCColorado Court of Appeals· 2001-11-08· cited 323×
- Carpenter v. DonohoeSupreme Court of Colorado· 1964-01-20· cited 127×
- Cosmopolitan Homes, Inc. v. WellerSupreme Court of Colorado· 1983-05-23· cited 107×
- Parrish Chiropractic Centers, P.C. v. Progressive Casualty Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Colorado· 1994-05-16· cited 75×
- Duncan v. Schuster-Graham Homes, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado· 1978-01-09· cited 63×
- Brown v. FowlerSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1979-06-14· cited 28×
- H. B. Bolas Enterprises, Inc. v. ZarlengoSupreme Court of Colorado· 1965-03-29· cited 22×
- Martinez v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado· 1968-09-03· cited 21×
- Rusch v. Lincoln-Devore Testing Laboratory, Inc.Colorado Court of Appeals· 1984-10-11· cited 21×
- Magill v. Ford Motor Co.Supreme Court of Colorado· 2016-09-12· cited 20×
- S K Peightal Engineers, Ltd. v. Mid Valley Real Estate Solutions V, LLCSupreme Court of Colorado· 2015-02-09· cited 17×
- Rogers v. Forest City Stapleton, IncColorado Court of Appeals· 2015-12-17· cited 3×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.