Annette Anderson v. Thyssenkrupp Elevator Corporation, 74655-3

Annette Anderson was injured on Oct. 21, 2011 when passenger elevator #2 in Boeing Park Plaza dropped several floors and stopped abruptly; she filed suit against ThyssenKrupp Elevator Corp. (TKE) for negligent maintenance.
The elevators were installed in 1987 and modernized in 2009 with ICE‑CPT controller (CPT) boards; CPT boards are sealed microprocessor units not repairable in the field and may fail intermittently or suddenly.
TKE began servicing the building in Oct. 2010; maintenance records show elevator #2 had five callbacks in the year before the incident, all for door problems, not CPT issues.
After the accident, TKE’s mechanic found elevator #2 stuck between floors; manufacturer testing showed the CPT board safety output circuit was failing and the board was replaced Nov. 1, 2011. TKE concluded the CPT board failure caused Anderson’s injury.
Anderson’s expert (Dr. Carr) agreed the CPT board failed but conceded such failures can be unpredictable; he asserted intermittent CPT problems existed and that maintenance/testing was insufficient, but provided no record evidence tying pre‑incident callbacks to CPT failure.
The trial court granted summary judgment for TKE, finding no genuine issue that the CPT failure was foreseeable; Anderson appealed and the Court of Appeals affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether TKE negligently maintained elevator #2 (i.e., whether the CPT failure and resulting drop were reasonably foreseeable)	Anderson: prior callbacks and overall maintenance practices put TKE on notice of a latent problem; more testing would have revealed CPT issues.	TKE: pre‑incident callbacks were door‑related and did not put TKE on notice of CPT board risk; CPT failures are unpredictable and not discoverable in the field.	Held for TKE — CPT failure was not shown to be reasonably foreseeable; no genuine issue of material fact on negligence.

MacMeekin v. Low Income Hous. Inst., Inc., 45 P.3d 570 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002) (standard of review for summary judgment)
Holmquist v. King County, 328 P.3d 1000 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014) (view facts in light most favorable to nonmoving party)
Iwai v. State, 915 P.2d 1089 (Wash. 1996) (elements of negligence)
Tincani v. Inland Empire Zoological Soc'y, 875 P.2d 621 (Wash. 1994) (proximate cause and negligence elements)
Maltman v. Sauer, 530 P.2d 254 (Wash. 1975) (foreseeability as part of duty analysis)
Seven Gables Corp. v. MGM/UA Entm't Co., 721 P.2d 1 (Wash. 1986) (affidavits and conclusory assertions insufficient to defeat summary judgment)