defendant's insurance companies. The unit was uninhabitable.
Under Article 6, Section 6.3-1 of the bylaws, the defendant is responsible to "arrange for the
prompt repair and restoreation" of the unit. Both parties notified their insurance companies.
Defendant's insurance covered the cost of cleaning and completely restoring the unit. Plaintiff's
policy covered her personal property, improvements and betterments, and the cost of alternate
living expenses in a comparable living situation for the reasonable period [*2]of time it would otherwise take to make the unit habitable.
Since the time of the fire, plaintiff has not returned to the unit. She claims that the unit
remains uninhabitable. To date, plaintiff has paid all common charges, additional fees,
homeowners insurance, taxes and other costs associated with the unit.
Plaintiff's remaining claims are sharply disputed. Plaintiff maintains that the defendant has
failed to restore the unit in a timely fashion and a workmanlike manner, and, therefore, seeks
damages for: [1] breach of the bylaws; [2] constructive eviction; [3] breach of the implied
warranty of habitability; and [4] breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
The defendant, however, argues that it has acted properly and otherwise consistent the
bylaws and has fulfilled its duties to plaintiff. It claims that plaintiff is solely responsible for
delaying the completion of the repair work. Through the affidavit of Toni D'Egidio, property
manager of the condominium, the defendant makes the following claims. Shortly after the fire,
the defendant promptly arranged for contractors to provide bids for repairs. The defendant claims
that this process was stalled and delayed by plaintiff because she refused to provide access to the