The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Ps are the owners of eight residential dwelling units in a condominium. D was the developer and builder. Ps alleged that D had not completed all construction work on the units. Ps were allegedly induced into final settlement by express representations that a list of deficiencies would be compiled and that subsequent to final settlement the incomplete work set forth on each list would be completed by D. Each P was provided with an 'Agreement of Warranty' setting forth the guarantees of D against defective material and workmanship. Ps as a group sued D for uncompleted work and defects. Some of the defects were global to the units such as rood leaks, central sewer, improper driveway, and air conditioning not working but others were individual. Ps sought specific performance or in the alternative a judgment for compensatory and punitive damages. D contends that the Chancellery Court has no jurisdiction because Ps have an adequate remedy at law.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.