Allen

Allen v. Sundean

Good Law
137 Cal. App. 3d 216·186 Cal. Rptr. 863·1982 Cal. App. LEXIS 2143
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 5, 1982Civ. 47862California3,782 words

Opinion

Opinion

Grodin, J.

This litigation arises out of property damage caused by a 1974 landslide in Santa Cruz. The. trial court, sitting by stipulation without a jury, found that Sundean, the original developer of the lots, was guilty of wilful misconduct in placing poor quality fill upon the hillside lots without proper compacting and engineering and of fraudulent concealment in failing to disclose to purchasers the nature and extent of the fill.

Though the development occurred some 20 years prior to the slide, the court rejected Sundean’s statute of limitations defense, finding that the claimants, Mallery and Allen, had neither actual nor constructive notice of Sundean’s wrongdoing prior to the slide. It also rejected Sundean’s contention that Mallery, one of the property owners, contributed to the landslide by failing to take corrective action. And, while it found that Kram, also one of the property owners and a cross-defendant, had contributed to the landslide by the negligent manner in which he conducted excavations on his property, it declined to allocate any portion of the judgment against Kram, indicating doubt as to whether comparative fault principles apply in the context of wilful…

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.