Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

contractplaintiffdefendantnegligenceliabilitytestimonywillsustained
contractplaintiffdefendantnegligenceliabilitywillsustained

Related Cases

Chris v. Epstein, 113 N.C.App. 751, 440 S.E.2d 581
View Case »
Bellamah v. Schmider, 68 N.M. 247, 360 P.2d 656, 1961 -NMSC- 037
View Case »
Pittsburgh-Des Moines Steel Co. v. Brookhaven Manor Water Co., 532 F.2d 572, 21 Fed.R.Serv.2d 1007, 18 UCC Rep.Serv. 931
View Case »
Turntables, Inc. v. Gestetner, 52 A.D.2d 776, 382 N.Y.S.2d 798, 19 UCC Rep.Serv. 131
View Case »
Levar v. Elkins, 604 P.2d 602
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Leigh v. Wadsworth, 361 P.2d 849, 1961 OK 62

Facts

Claribel Wadsworth, the plaintiff, was injured when the roof of the back porch of a house, built by the defendant H. B. Leigh, collapsed on her while she was a tenant. The house was constructed in 1949 and sold shortly thereafter. The porch roof was secured with eleven nails, of which only a few penetrated the structural supports, leading to its eventual failure. Expert testimony indicated that the construction did not meet accepted building practices.

Claribel Wadsworth, the plaintiff, was injured when the roof of the back porch of a house, built by the defendant H. B. Leigh, collapsed on her while she was a tenant.

Issue

Was the builder liable for the injuries sustained by the tenant due to the collapse of the porch roof, given the lack of privity of contract and the time elapsed since construction?

Was the builder liable for the injuries sustained by the tenant due to the collapse of the porch roof, given the lack of privity of contract and the time elapsed since construction?

Rule

A builder's liability to third persons for negligent construction can persist even after the property has been accepted by a grantee if the builder has willfully created a condition that is immediately and certainly dangerous to others.

A builder's liability to third persons for negligent construction can persist even after the property has been accepted by a grantee if the builder has willfully created a condition that is immediately and certainly dangerous to others.

Analysis

The court applied the rule by examining the construction of the porch roof, which was found to be inadequate and dangerous. Despite the time elapsed since the house was built, the court determined that the nature of the construction made it imminently dangerous from the moment it was erected. The evidence supported the conclusion that the builder's negligence was the proximate cause of the injuries.

The court applied the rule by examining the construction of the porch roof, which was found to be inadequate and dangerous.

Conclusion

The court affirmed the lower court's ruling, holding the builder liable for the injuries sustained by the plaintiff due to the dangerous condition of the porch roof.

The court affirmed the lower court's ruling, holding the builder liable for the injuries sustained by the plaintiff due to the dangerous condition of the porch roof.

Who won?

Claribel Wadsworth prevailed in the case because the court found that the builder's negligence in constructing the porch roof created an immediately dangerous condition, leading to her injuries.

Claribel Wadsworth prevailed in the case because the court found that the builder's negligence in constructing the porch roof created an immediately dangerous condition, leading to her injuries.

You must be