Court: |
WI Supreme Court |
|
Facts: |
Antwaun has lead poisoning. Both mom's and aunt's house have
lead paint. |
|
Posture: |
Suits filed against landlords and insurers, all but one settle or
are dismissed. Appeal from judgment for the landlords. |
|
Issue: |
Should the landlords have known about the lead paint? |
|
Holding: |
Yes, the court erred, but we dismiss anyway. |
|
Rule: |
No privity: Antwaun wasn't a party to the contract at his
aunt's house, and the implied warranty cause against
his mom's landlord seeks compensatory not contractual
damages. |
|
Reasoning: |
Landlords had notice of the deteriorating paint. There's
a general duty of reasonable care in WI. We can't
seriously maintain any longer that lead paint is an
unknown risk, or that tenant eating of premises is
unforeseen. There is a duty to test for lead paint,
as a result, and the circuit court erred in giving
summary judgment. There is an implied warranty of
habitability. But... |
|
Dicta: |
|