Home Table of Contents

AMI 1206 Extension of Implied Warranties to a Subsequent Purchaser of a House

Arkansas Supreme Court Committee On Jury Instructions-Civil

Ark. Model Jury Instr., Civil AMI 1206
Arkansas Model Jury Instructions-Civil
November 2021 Update
Arkansas Supreme Court Committee On Jury Instructions-Civil
Chapter 12. Construction
AMI 1206 Extension of Implied Warranties to a Subsequent Purchaser of a House
In this case, (plaintiff) did not purchase the house from (defendant). The implied warranties of habitability, sound workmanship, and proper construction may be extended to (plaintiff) as a subsequent purchaser. In order to extend these warranties to (plaintiff), [he][she] has the burden of proving each of four essential propositions:
First, that there has been no substantial change or alteration in the condition of the house from the original sale;
Second, the defects in the house were not discoverable by (plaintiff) by reasonable inspection;
Third, the defects in the house became clearly apparent only after the purchase of the house; and
Fourth, (plaintiff) asserted [his][her] claim against (defendant) within a reasonable length of time from (defendant's) original sale of the house.
NOTE ON USE
Use this instruction with AMI 1205 when the plaintiff is a subsequent purchaser of the house.
COMMENT
“[T]he builder-vendor's implied warranty of fitness for habitation runs not only in favor of the first owner, but extends to subsequent purchasers for a reasonable length of time where there is no substantial change or alteration in the condition of the building from the original sale. This implied warranty is limited to latent defects which are not discoverable by subsequent purchasers upon reasonable inspection and which become manifest only after the purchase.” Blagg v. Fred Hunt Co., 272 Ark. 185, 187, 612 S.W.2d 321, 322 (1981).
Where a subsequent purchaser has knowledge of the defect, he cannot recover for breach of the implied warranties. Bankston v. McKenzie, 287 Ark. 350, 698 S.W.2d 799 (1985).
Absent fraudulent concealment, the statute of repose set out in Ark. Code Ann. § 16-56-112 will bar a claim for breach of the implied warranty of habitability brought more than five years after substantial completion of the house. Rogers v. Mallory, 328 Ark. 116, 941 S.W.2d 421 (1997) (finding that the court's holdings in cases such as Sanders v. Walker, 298 Ark. 374, 767 S.W.2d 526 (1989), and Blagg, supra, that the implied warranty of habitability extends to subsequent purchasers and exists for a “reasonable length of time” is nonetheless subject to Ark. Code Ann. § 16-56-112).
End of Document