Elliott Homes, Inc. v. Superior Court of Sacramento County
6 Cal. App. 5th 333
| Cal. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Homeowners (Real Parties) sued Elliott Homes for construction defects in 17 single‑family homes built after Jan 1, 2003, alleging physical damage and asserting common‑law theories (strict products liability, negligence).
- The Right to Repair Act (SB 800; Civ. Code §§ 895–945.5) establishes substantive standards for residential construction and a mandatory nonadversarial prelitigation notice/repair procedure for claims "seeking recovery of damages arising out of, or related to deficiencies in, residential construction." (§§ 896, 910‑938.)
- Real Parties did not provide SB 800 prelitigation notice to Elliott before filing suit.
- Elliott moved to stay the litigation under § 930(b) until Real Parties completed the SB 800 prelitigation procedure; the trial court denied the stay, concluding SB 800 did not apply because plaintiffs pleaded only common‑law claims for actual damages.
- Elliott sought writ relief from the Court of Appeal; the appellate court stayed the trial proceedings and reviewed whether SB 800’s prelitigation procedure applies even when plaintiffs plead common‑law causes of action for actual damage.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether SB 800’s prelitigation notice/repair procedure applies to claims that plead only common‑law causes of action for actual damage | SB 800 applies only to actions that allege violations of SB 800’s standards; common‑law claims for actual damage need not follow the prelitigation procedure | SB 800 applies to any action seeking recovery of damages arising out of or related to residential construction defects; plaintiffs must comply with the prelitigation procedure before filing | Held: SB 800 applies to all such construction‑related damage claims (unless expressly excepted). Homeowners must comply with the Chapter 4 prelitigation procedure before proceeding; the trial court’s denial of the stay was reversed and a stay ordered. |
Key Cases Cited
- Aas v. Superior Court, 24 Cal.4th 627 (Cal. 2000) (Supreme Court held defects not causing actual property damage were not actionable in tort)
- Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Brookfield Crystal Cove LLC, 219 Cal.App.4th 98 (Cal. Ct. App.) (held Right to Repair Act did not preclude common‑law recovery for actual damage; Court of Appeal decision disagreed with in this opinion)
- Smith v. Superior Court, 39 Cal.4th 77 (Cal. 2006) (statutory construction principle: read provisions in context of entire statutory scheme)
- Baeza v. Superior Court, 201 Cal.App.4th 1214 (Cal. Ct. App.) (writ relief standard; extraordinary relief when no adequate remedy on appeal)