Pham v. Corbett, 187 Wash. App. 816 (2015)

Citation: Pham v. Corbett, 187 Wash. App. 816 (2015)
Parent Document: Pham v. Corbett, 187 Wash. App. 816 (2015)
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Effective Date: 2015-05-26
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4956711/pham-v-corbett/ ↗

Full Text

682 chars

Pham also argues that the trial court erred in finding that he breached the duty imposed by the implied warranty of habitability, because the duty requires *831nothing more than for a landlord to act with “reasonable diligence to eliminate dangers that pose an actual or potential safety hazard to its occupants.” Br. of Appellant at 12. He contends, “There is no breach if the landlord’s efforts are reasonable but unsuccessful.” Id. But the case Pham cites, Lian v. Stalick, 106 Wn. App. 811, 818, 25 P.3d 467 (2001), supports neither proposition. Nowhere in Lian does the court suggest that a finding of breach is precluded if a landlord merely takes reasonable measures to cure.

Other Sections in This Document (66)

Full Text