Sturm, Ruger & Co. v. Superior Court

Good Law
164 Cal. App. 3d 579·1985 Cal. App. LEXIS 1621·210 Cal. Rptr. 573
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 7, 1985Civ. 24664California988 words

Opinion

Opinion

Puglia, J.

Petitioners are defendants in an action for damages commenced in respondent superior court by real parties in interest. The complaint seeks compensation for injuries incurred by real party Buddy Ray Smith when a revolver manufactured by petitioner Sturm, Ruger & Company, Inc., and sold by petitioner Simms Hardware Company accidentally discharged. Real parties allege three causes of action on theories of negligence, strict products liability and loss of consortium.

The revolver was purchased by real party in Sacramento on January 5, 1960, but the accident which gave rise to this litigation did not occur until October 9, 1981, in Oregon. At the time of the mishap, real parties were residents of the State of Oregon. Relying on these undisputed facts, petitioners sought summary judgment in the superior court on the grounds that the action, if brought in Oregon, would be barred by lapse of time under Oregon Revised Statutes sections 12.115 and 30.905, and therefore cannot be maintained in California by virtue of this state’s “borrowing statute,” Code of Civil Procedure section 361. Section 361 provides: “When a cause of action has arisen in another State, or in a foreign…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.