130 N.H. 782, 547 A.2d 290 (N.H. 1988)
Lempke v. Dagenais is a cornerstone decision in construction law and consumer protection that reshaped the privity barrier in warranty claims.
May a subsequent purchaser of residential property sue a contractor for breach of an implied warranty of workmanlike construction despite the absence of privity, and, if so, what limitations govern such a claim?
A contractor who constructs or substantially improves a residence impliedly warrants to the owner, and to subsequent purchasers, that the work was performed in a reasonably workmanlike manner and that the resulting structure is reasonably fit for its intended use. Lack of contractual privity does not bar a subsequent purchaser's action for breach of this implied warranty. The warranty covers latent defects not discoverable upon reasonable inspection and that manifest within a reasonable time after construction. The cause of action accrues when the defect is or reasonably should have been discovered.
Yes. The implied warranty of workmanlike quality in residential construction extends to subsequent purchasers notwithstanding lack of privity. The claim is limited to latent defects discovered within a reasonable time and is subject to a discovery-based accrual. The trial court's dismissal of the warranty claim for lack of privity was reversed and the case remanded.
Lempke is a leading authority on implied warranties in residential construction and the erosion of the privity barrier. It is frequently taught to illustrate how courts adapt contract principles to protect subsequent home purchasers, align incentives for quality workmanship, and cabin exposure through latent-defect and reasonable-time limits. For law students, the case is a blueprint for issue-spotting across contracts, torts (economic loss concerns), remedies (cost of repair versus diminution in value), and statutes of limitations (discovery accrual in latent-defect cases).