For the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion, we reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals.
REVERSED.
Justice EDMUNDS did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.
Brevorka v. Wolfe Construction, Inc., 357 N.C. 566 (2003)
Nov. 7, 2003
·
Supreme Court of North Carolina
·
No. 76A03
357 N.C. 566
PETER BREVORKA and wife CAROLE BREVORKA v. WOLFE CONSTRUCTION, INC.
No. 76A03
(Filed 7 November 2003)
Vendor and Purchaser; Warranties— warranty of habitability— limited warranty agreement — civil action not barred
The decision of the Court of Appeals in this case is reversed for the reason stated in the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals that the language of a limited warranty agreement for a house purchased by plaintiffs did not bar plaintiffs from maintaining an action for breach of the implied warranty of habitability or workmanlike quality against the builder-vendor.
Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 155 N.C. App. 353, 573 S.E.2d 656 (2002), reversing an order entered 3 October 2001 by Judge Catherine C. Eagles in Superior Court, Guilford County, and remanding for entry of a stay of plaintiffs’ action pending arbitration. Heard in the Supreme Court 13 October 2003.
Alexander Ralston, Speckhard & Speckhard, L.L.R, by Stanley E. Speckhard, for plaintiff-appellants.
Tuggle Duggins & Meschan, P.A., by Kenneth J. Gumbiner, for defendant-appellee.
Roy Cooper, Attorney General, by Gary R. Govert, Special Deputy Attorney General, on behalf of the Consumer Protection Division of the North Carolina Department of Justice, amicus curiae.
Lewis & Roberts, PLLC, by Gary W. Jackson and Kurt F. Hausler, on behalf of the North Carolina Academy of Trial Lawyers, amicus curiae.