Oliver v. Superior Court

Opinion

BENKE, J.

Regis Builders, Inc. (Regis), constructed a single-family residence in San Diego which was purchased by Mark and Lisa Oliver (Oliver). Sometime later, deficiencies began to appear and Oliver brought suit for negligence, breach of implied warranty, strict liability and negligent misrepresentation. A second amended complaint added a cause of action for fraud.

Regis brought a motion for summary adjudication of issues seeking to eliminate the cause of action for strict liability. It did not dispute it had been a developer of commercial properties during 1978 to 1980, the period in question. However, Regis argued it was not a mass producer of residential units because it had built only two single-family homes and thus was not subject to strict liability. The trial court agreed with Regis. Oliver thereafter sought relief from the trial court’s ruling by way of petition for mandate. The question presented is whether the theory of strict liability applies to other than mass-produced homes. We conclude it does not.

The doctrine of strict liability was first extended to developers of residential housing in

Kriegler

v.

Eichler Homes, Inc.

(1969) 269 Cal.App.2d 224 [74 Cal.Rptr. 749], where the court found no difference between Eichler’s mass production and sale of more than 4,000 residential units and the mass

[88]

production and sale of cars. Quoting extensively from

Schipper

v.

Levitt & Sons, Inc.

(1965) 44 N.J. 70 [207 A.2d 314, 325-326], the

Kriegler

court noted: “ ‘When a vendee buys a development house from an advertised model, as in a Levitt or in a comparable project, he clearly relies on the skill of the developer . . . that the house will be erected in reasonably workmanlike manner ....’” (269 Cal.App.2d at p. 228.)