Gariffa v. Taylor
Wyoming Supreme Court
675 P.2d 1284 (1984)

- Written by Laura Julien, JD
Facts
Brian and Marla Gariffa (defendants) sold property in Wyoming to James and Catherine Taylor (plaintiffs). On the preprinted real estate listing for the property, the broker typed “septic” above the sewerage section on the form. While touring the property, the Taylors asked where the septic tank was located on the property and if it had been pumped. The Gariffas, who had lived in the home for the preceding 15 years, stated that the tank was located somewhere north of the house and that it had not been pumped. The Taylors purchased the property, and after occupying it for 19 months, they hired a service company to pump the septic tank. It was ultimately determined that there was no septic tank located on the property. The Taylors hired a contractor to install a septic tank and sent the bill to the Gariffas, which the Gariffas refused to pay. The Taylors then filed suit, alleging breach of an express warranty based on the representation of “septic” made on the real estate listing. At trial, the Gariffas testified that the house was at least 40 years old and that they had never experienced any issues during the entirety of the time that they resided there. The Gariffas also stated that they had no special knowledge regarding septic systems and there was no practical way of examining the property to confirm a septic tank’s existence without digging up the property. The trial court found in favor of the Taylors on the ground that the real estate listing’s reference to “septic” created an express warranty. The Gariffas appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Cardine, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.