Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Columbia Western Corp. v. Vela, 592 P.2d 1294.

45 citing documents.

Pointe 16 v. Gtis-Hov Ariz. 2025
Pointe 16 v. Gtis-Hov Ariz. 2025
Constr., Inc., ¶ 5 (2008) ().
Tina Zambrano v. M & Rc II LLC Ariz. 2022
Tina Zambrano v. M & Rc II LLC Ariz. 2022
(describing the rule as “an anachronism patently out of harmony with modern home buying practices” (quoting Humber v. Morton, 426 S.W.2d 554, 562 (Tex.
Zambrano v. M and Rc II Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Zambrano v. M and Rc II Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Sirrah Enterprises, LLC v. Wunderlich 377 P.3d 360 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Sirrah Enterprises, LLC v. Wunderlich 377 P.3d 360 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Sullivan v. Pulte Home Corp. 354 P.3d 424 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Embrey v. Burrows Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Embrey v. Burrows Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
See, e.g., Lofts, 218 Ariz. at 575, 190 P.3d at 734; Richards, 139 Ariz. at 242, 678 P.2d at 427; (discussing implied warranty).
Yanni, Thompson, Gunderson, Sayegh v. Tucker Plumbing, Inc., Brewer Enterprises, Inc. 312 P.3d 1130 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
Yanni, Thompson, Gunderson, Sayegh v. Tucker Plumbing, Inc., Brewer Enterprises, Inc. 312 P.3d 1130 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
Lofts at Fillmore Condominium Association v. Reliance Commercial Construction, Inc. 190 P.3d 733 Ariz. 2008
Lofts at Fillmore Condominium Association v. Reliance Commercial Construction, Inc. 190 P.3d 733 Ariz. 2008
the builder-vendor impliedly warrants that the construction was done in a workmanlike manner and that the structure is habitable.”
Lofts at Fillmore Condominium Ass'n v. Reliance Commercial Construction, Inc. 189 P.3d 426 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Lofts at Fillmore Condominium Ass'n v. Reliance Commercial Construction, Inc. 189 P.3d 426 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
extended to these subsequent purchasers.
Hershey v. Rich Rosen Construction Co. 817 P.2d 55 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
Hershey v. Rich Rosen Construction Co. 817 P.2d 55 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
and were extended to subsequent *114 purchasers by our supreme court in Richards v. Powercraft Homes, Inc.
Buchanan v. Scottsdale Environmental Construction & Development Co. 787 P.2d 1081 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
Buchanan v. Scottsdale Environmental Construction & Development Co. 787 P.2d 1081 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
Colberg v. Rellinger 770 P.2d 346 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
Colberg v. Rellinger 770 P.2d 346 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
Formento v. Encanto Business Park 744 P.2d 22 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
Formento v. Encanto Business Park 744 P.2d 22 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
While it is true that Arizona courts have imposed implied warranties upon builder-vendors in favor of residential buyers in new home construction, , we do not believe that imposing implied warranties on the seller of raw land is appropriate.
Nastri v. Wood Bros. Homes, Inc. 690 P.2d 158 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
Nastri v. Wood Bros. Homes, Inc. 690 P.2d 158 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
Woodward v. Chirco Const. Co., Inc. 687 P.2d 1269 Ariz. 1984
Woodward v. Chirco Const. Co., Inc. 687 P.2d 1269 Ariz. 1984
Dillig v. Fisher 688 P.2d 693 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
Dillig v. Fisher 688 P.2d 693 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
and implicitly approved by the Supreme Court in Richards v. Powercraft Homes, Inc.
Woodward v. Chirco Const. Co., Inc. 687 P.2d 1275 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
Woodward v. Chirco Const. Co., Inc. 687 P.2d 1275 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
Richards v. Powercraft Homes, Inc. 678 P.2d 427 Ariz. 1984
Richards v. Powercraft Homes, Inc. 678 P.2d 427 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Richards v. Powercraft Homes, Inc. 678 P.2d 427 Ariz. 1984
builder-vendors of new homes were held to impliedly warrant that construction has been done in a workmanlike manner and that the structure is habitable.
Richards v. Powercraft Homes, Inc. 678 P.2d 427 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
builder-vendors of new homes were held to impliedly warrant that construction has been done in a workmanlike manner and that the structure is habitable.
Richards v. Powercraft Homes, Inc. 678 P.2d 449 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1983
Richards v. Powercraft Homes, Inc. 678 P.2d 449 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1983
holds that a builder-vendor of new construction impliedly warrants that its construction is done in workmanlike manner and that the structure is habitable.
Richards v. Powercraft Homes, Inc. 678 P.2d 449 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1983
Richards v. Powercraft Homes, Inc. 678 P.2d 449 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1983
holds that a builder-vendor of new construction impliedly warrants that its construction is done in workmanlike manner and that the structure is habitable.
Smith v. Continental Bank 636 P.2d 98 Ariz. 1981
Smith v. Continental Bank 636 P.2d 98 Ariz. 1981
the court of appeals held that the builder-vendor of a new home “impliedly warrants that the construction was done in a workmanlike manner and that the structure is habitable.” The bank argues that it is not necessary to decide whether the rule in Columbia *322 Western should be ad
Chirco Construction Co v. Stewart Title & Trust 629 P.2d 1023 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1981
Chirco Construction Co v. Stewart Title & Trust 629 P.2d 1023 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1981
the builder-vendor impliedly warrants that the construction was done in a workmanlike manner and that the structure is habitable.”