Valdivia v. CertainTeed
Plaintiffs Isabel Valdivia on behalf of herself and a proposed class, HUD Investments, LLC, and Karen Schneiter appeal from a judgment in favor of defendants CertainTeed Corporation (CertainTeed), Anlin Industries (Anlin), and Mikron Industries, Inc. (Mikron) (collectively defendants), who are manufacturers of replacement vinyl windows installed in plaintiffs' properties. Plaintiffs' operative pleading sought to recover damages in the form of costs of removing and replacing the allegedly defective vinyl windows under theories of negligence and strict liability. The trial court sustained Mikron's demurrer to plaintiffs' fourth amended complaint without leave to amend and granted the other defendants' motions for judgment on the pleadings in part on grounds the economic loss rule barred recovery of purely economic loss under strict liability and negligence causes of action. On appeal from the ensuing judgment, plaintiffs contend (1) the economic loss rule does not preclude them from proceeding in strict liability or negligence because they pleaded and can prove at trial that property damage resulted from the defendants' product; (2) the economic loss rule does not dictate the types of compensatory damages or remedies once the elements of a tort cause of action are established; and (3) they sufficiently pleaded a cause of action for violation of the Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA). Court conclude the economic loss rule does not bar plaintiffs' tort causes of action. Further, Court decline to find a waiver of plaintiffs' appellate arguments as to their CLRA cause of action. Accordingly, Court reverse the judgment.
Comments on Valdivia v. CertainTeed