Tassan v. United Development Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• determining that a developer-vendor of condominium units could be held liable for breach of implied warranty of habitability
• determining that a developer-vendor of condominium units could be held liable for breach of implied warranty of habitability
• acknowledging that a condominium association would not have standing to assert a claim for breach of implied warranty of habitability “but for the fact that [section 9.1(b) of the Act] apparently gives the association standing to assert the unit owners’ rights in the common elements”
• acknowledging that a condominium association would not have standing to assert a claim for breach of implied warranty of habitability \but for the fact that [section 9.1(b) of the Act] apparently gives the association standing to assert the unit owners' rights in the common elements\
• extending the implied warranty of habitability to developer-vendors and condominium purchasers
• extending the implied warranty of habitability to developer-vendors and condominium purchasers

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).