Business Law Case Study Final Paper

Words: 2079
Pages: 9

Final Paper Case Study 11

In the Final Paper (Case Study) it speaks to the following case and circumstances. Knarles and Barkley are father and son respectively. Barkley is seventeen years old. They operate a facilities maintenance company that regularly does business in the District of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia. The company is based in Maryland. They have a number of contracts with building owners where they have agreed to provide building maintenance to both residential and commercial buildings within the three jurisdictions already mentioned. They receive a monthly payment of $2,000 to $4,000 depending upon the size of the building. They bill the owners for any equipment of a substantial nature that has to be replaced.
…show more content…
Therefore, Chetum is liable for Battery
Breach of Covenant of Quiet Enjoyment
Under common law, the breach of quiet enjoyment occurs where a landlord acts or fails to act to secure the quiet enjoyment of a tenant in the tenancy.
The residents have a right under the lease agreement to the quiet enjoyment of their tenancy. Chetum’s failure to replace the boiler, while knowing of it’s defects is a breach of covenant. Therefore, Chetum is liable for breach of quiet enjoyment.
Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith
Under common law, Breach of the Implied Covenant of Good Faith occurs where a contracting party acts to prevent another party from obtaining the benefit of the contractual bargin. The breach sounds in tort where the breaching party has a special duty.
The residents have a contractual party, which under modern law, requires that the landlord provide adequate heating. Chetum’s failure to do this, opting, instead for a repair of a dangerously defective boiler, prevents the residents from enjoying the benefit of the lease, and is a breach of the covenant of good faith.

Residents vs. Housewarm
Strict Product Liability:
In Greenman vs. Yuba Power Products, (59 Cal. 2d 57, 1963) the California Supreme Court established the law of Strict Product Liability, which occurs where a plaintiff is injured by a product that is defective in design, manufacture or