Leno v. K & L Homes, Inc.
2011 ND 171
| N.D. | 2011Background
- Lenos purchased a newly-constructed house from K & L Homes and soon alleged cracks, unevenness, and shifting from improper construction.
- Plaintiffs asserted breach of contract and implied warranties that the house conformed to codes, was fit for residence, and built to sound engineering standards; negligence claims were later dropped.
- K & L Homes denied liability and asserted the Lenos’ fault; district court denied a comparative fault instruction and found no disclaimer of warranties as a matter of law.
- Before trial, K & L Homes sought an inspection and to have a witness testify about jury-view observations; the district court denied both requests.
- Jury found in favor of the Lenos for breach of contract or implied warranty; K & L Homes appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether fault and comparative fault apply to breach of warranty claims | Leno argues fault is not relevant to contract/implied warranty claims. | K & L Homes argues fault and comparative fault should apply under ch. 32-03.2. | Fault/comparative fault do not apply to contract-based implied warranties. |
| Whether the district court properly refused a comparative fault instruction | Comparative fault instructions unnecessary in warranty contract case. | The jury should apportion fault under statutory scheme. | District court did not err in denying comparative fault instruction. |
| Whether K & L Homes properly disclaimed implied warranties via the Homeowners’ Guide | Disclaimers at closing could affect warranties. | Disclaimer must be part of the bargain; closing-time disclaimer ineffective. | No disclaimer of implied warranties as a matter of law. |
| Whether the district court abused its discretion denying inspection and witness testimony | Inspection and testimony could illuminate damages. | Discovery deadlines and fairness require denial. | No abuse of discretion; denial affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Dobler v. Malloy, 214 N.W.2d 510 (N.D. 1973) (Implied warranty of fitness for purposes in construction contracts)
- Air Heaters, Inc. v. Johnson Electric, Inc., 258 N.W.2d 649 (N.D. 1977) (Implied warranties in construction contracts; court findings of fact)
- Steiner v. Ford Motor Co., 2000 ND 31 (N.D. 2000) (Economic loss doctrine and breach of warranty actions)
- Clarys v. Ford Motor Co., 1999 ND 72 (N.D. 1999) (Economic loss doctrine and contract vs. tort distinction)
- Dakota Grain Co., Inc. v. Ehrmantrout, 502 N.W.2d 234 (N.D. 1993) (Products liability framework and comparative fault context)
- Day v. Gen. Motors Corp., 345 N.W.2d 349 (N.D. 1984) (Mod. comparative fault and warranty/contract implications)
- Mauch v. Mfrs. Sales & Serv., Inc., 345 N.W.2d 338 (N.D. 1984) (Tort reform and comparative fault history)
- Peterson v. Bendix Home Sys., Inc., 318 N.W.2d 50 (Minn. 1982) (Implied warranty and tort/contract distinction in breach of warranty)