Also known as: good and workmanlike manner · good and workmanlike performance · workmanlike manner
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A quality standard requiring that construction or services be performed with reasonable skill and care so the result is fit for its intended use. In the sale of new residential construction the standard supports an implied warranty that the home is designed and built in a reasonably workmanlike manner and is suitable for human habitation.
Gabriel Gonzalez bought a new townhome from a city housing authority that had developed and sold the units. Two years later he resold it to Gwen Gallagher. After moving in Gwen discovered severe foundation settling and water intrusion that made the home unsafe. She sued the authority for breach of the implied warranty of workmanlike construction. Because the jurisdiction permits subsequent purchasers to enforce the warranty the claim proceeds.
Griffin Industries built a spec house and sold it to a contractor who lived there briefly. The contractor then sold the house to Nina Giordano. Nina discovered an improperly poured foundation causing severe cracking and unsafe conditions. She sued the builder for breach of the implied warranty. Under the majority rule the lack of privity does not bar her claim for the latent construction defect.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Grove Manufacturing built starter homes and sold one to the Lees under a standard contract. Three years later the Lees sold the home to the Martins. The Martins discovered severe foundation defects that rendered the home unsafe. They sued the builder for breach of the implied warranty of workmanlike construction. Because the jurisdiction limits enforcement to parties in privity with the builder the Martins claim fails.
Global Dynamics constructed a new home and sold it to an initial buyer who occupied it for eighteen months. The buyer then sold the home to Ken Guzman after a standard inspection. Ken discovered extensive foundation cracks that made portions of the house unsafe. He sued the builder for breach of the implied warranty. The absence of privity and the intervening occupancy prevent the claim from proceeding under the restrictive approach.
Many jurisdictions recognize the warranty in sales of new residential construction but courts split on whether it reaches buyers who lack privity with the original builder. Some states limit enforcement to the first purchaser while others allow later buyers to sue when latent defects affect habitability.
Supporting sources
The warranty covers serious latent construction problems that impair basic soundness or habitability such as foundation failures water intrusion and unsafe structural conditions. Minor cosmetic issues or defects caused by later use do not qualify.
Supporting sources
In jurisdictions that follow the minority restrictive approach only the original purchaser in direct contractual privity with the builder may sue. Subsequent buyers must pursue remedies against their immediate seller or under other theories.
Supporting sources
…should be held to what is impliedly represented — that the completed structure was designed and constructed in a reasonably workmanlike manner." ( Id. at p. 380.) Similarly, application of strict liability in tort has not been limited to those engaged in commerce in personalty but has been applied where appropriate to those…