Peterson v. Superior Court, 899 P.2d 905 (1995)

Citation: Peterson v. Superior Court, 899 P.2d 905 (1995)
Parent Document: Peterson v. Superior Court, 899 P.2d 905 (1995)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 1995-08-21
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1360581/peterson-v-superior-court/ ↗

Full Text

1,082 chars

This reasoning applies with even greater force to a landlord or hotel owner who purchases an apartment building or hotel. Defects in such a structure may have been created by the builder, a subcontractor, a manufacturer of building supplies or fixtures, a previous owner of the building, or a previous tenant of the apartment or guest of the hotel. Because the landlord or hotel owner generally has no continuing business relationship, or other ready channel of communication, with any of these persons or entities, only in rare cases would the imposition of strict liability upon the landlord or hotel owner create an impetus to manufacture safer products. As one commentator has recognized: “Unlike other suppliers .... landlords’ ability to improve their products’ safety is rather limited. Landlords cannot redesign the products or switch manufacturers; they can only repair the defects they know about. While imposing strict landlord liability will encourage landlords to make such repairs, it provides no greater safety incentive than imposing negligence liability.” (Comment,

Other Sections in This Document (225)

Full Text