Whether in Hugo, Scandia or Duluth, Minnesota recognizes an implied warranty of fitness for purpose in construction contracts. An implied warranty is one that exists as a matter of law, regardless of whether it is written in as part of the contract.
The implied warranty in a construction contract exists when:
(1) the contractor holds himself out, expressly or by implication, as competent to undertake the contract; and
(2) the owner has no particular expertise in the kind of work contemplated;
(3) furnishes no plans, design, specifications, details, or blueprints; and
(4) tacitly or specifically indicates his reliance on the experience and skill of the contractor, after making known to him the specific purposes for which the building is intended.
Minnesota courts construe the doctrine of implied warranty liberally. That is, the doctrine is construed in favor of the homeowner, but against the contractor. In reviewing the elements, the primary points for a contractor to be aware of in its defense are items 2 and 3. I expect that items 1 and 4 will pretty much universally be held by a court to be in the homeowner's favor.
How much this adds from a liability perspective depends on the contractor's written agreement, but it is another cause of action for both homeowners and contractors to be aware of when addressing construction problems.
The material contained herein is provided for informational purposes only and is not legal advice, nor is it a substitute for obtaining legal advice from an attorney. Each situation is unique, and you should not act or rely on any information contained herein without seeking the advice of an experienced attorney. All information contained in links are the property of the linked site.
