For those of you that have been following along, in Long Grove, the original apartment Developer (and its affiliated general contractor and architect) prevailed against the POA in the Developer’s attempt to disclaim liability to downstream purchasers as part of the sale of an apartment complex to a Condo Converter Developer. The original Developer had bargained for and received warranty disclaimers on behalf of itself and all “affiliates” when it sold the apartment complex to the Condo Converter Developer. The disclaimers were incorporated into the master deed, thereby putting downstream purchasers on notice. The circuit court granted summary judgment in favor of the Developer (and its affiliates), finding 1) the Developer did not put the condos into the stream of commerce because they were not intended to be converted at the time of design; 2) because the disclaimers of warranties were incorporated into the master deed, subsequent buyers were effectively put on notice; and 3) the Developer effectively and permissibly transferred its liability to the Condo Converter Developer, such that the POA’s recourse was against the Condo Converter Developer rather than the original Developer.
The Court of Appeals affirmed in a two-paragraph, per curiam opinion: Long Grove at Seaside Farms, LLC v. Long Grove Prop. Owners’ Ass’n, No. 2015-UP-377, 2015 S.C. App. Unpub. LEXIS 457 (S.C. Ct. App. July 29, 2015). The Supreme Court heard the appeal several months ago, but has now decided it should never have accepted the case and dismissed the writ as “improvidently granted.” Thus, the case is effectively ended as to the original Developer and its affiliates.