Aronsohn v. Mandara

484 A.2d 675 (1984)

From our private database of 46,100+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Aronsohn v. Mandara

Supreme Court of New Jersey
484 A.2d 675 (1984)

Facts

In 1974, the Kawashes contracted with Mandara Masonry Corporation (Mandara) (defendant) to build a patio at the Kawashes’ home. The Aronsohns (plaintiffs) later purchased the home from the Kawashes. In 1978, the Aronsohns noticed that the patio was starting to fall apart. The Aronsohns sued, alleging that Mandara’s allegedly improper construction had breached both express and implied warranties of good workmanship. The trial court found for Mandara. The trial court held that the Aronsohns could not have an express warranty claim because there was no privity of contract between the Aronsohns and Mandara. Further, the trial court held that the implied warranty of habitability did not apply to service contracts like the patio-building contract between the Kawashes and Mandara. Therefore, the Aronsohns could not pursue that claim either. The Aronsohns appealed. Although the appellate court disagreed that this patio-building contract was a service contract, it held that there was no express or implied warranty because there was no privity of contract between the Aronsohns and Mandara. The Aronsohns appealed again.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Schreiber, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 748,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 748,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,100 briefs, keyed to 987 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 748,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,100 briefs - keyed to 987 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership