McCarthy
McCarthy v. Martinson
Opinion
Opinion
Nott, J.
In a 1985 decision that raised the eyebrows of legal scholars and the temperature of the business community, the California Supreme Court held that a residential landlord could be strictly liable to a tenant for latent defects in an apartment. (Becker v. IRM Corp. (1985) 38 Cal.3d 454 [ 213 Cal.Rptr. 213 , 698 P.2d 116 , 48 A.L.R.4th 601 ].) The Supreme Court has recently reversed that part of Becker which dealt with strict liability. (Peterson v. Superior Court (1995) 10 Cal.4th 1185 [ 43 Cal.Rptr.2d 836 , 899 P.2d 905 ] .) The question before us is whether Peterson applies retroactively. We hold that it does.
Facts
The facts are not in dispute. In September of 1986, respondents Leslie H. and Constance Martinson purchased an existing 26-unit apartment building that contained untempered glass sliding doors. Respondents had no part in the construction of the building or the installation of any glass doors.
On August 1, 1992, appellant Debbie Ann McCarthy leased one of the apartments from respondents. Twelve days later, she sustained cuts when she inadvertently walked through the untempered glass door leading to her balcony.