Hernandez

*190 In 2004, Janine Hernandez was a passenger in a 1992 Oldsmobile Cutlass that was involved in a head-on collision with another car. Hernandez, who was 11 years old at the time, was seriously injured. In 2012, she filed this action against Enterprise Rent-A-Car and its affiliates (Enterprise) to recover damages resulting from the car accident, alleging a single cause of action for strict products liability. In 2017, the trial court granted Enterprise summary judgment. Because Enterprise did not succeed to whatever liability for this accident a different car rental company might have had, we affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Hernandez contends the 1992 Oldsmobile Cutlass involved in her 2004 accident was defective because it was not designed to be crashworthy. Specifically, she alleges that the Oldsmobile did not provide adequate protection to children riding in the back seat when the vehicle was involved in a frontal collision. Hernandez does not here attempt to hold the product manufacturer liable for this alleged defect. Instead, she contends that a rental car company called National Car Rental Systems *470 (NCRS) would have been strictly liable for her damages…

At 11 years old, plaintiff Janine Hernandez suffered grievous injuries when the car in which she was riding, a 1992 Oldsmobile driven by her sister, was involved in a head-on collision. She survived, but as a paraplegic. She tried to sue various defendants based on a defective design theory, including General Motors Corporation (GM), the manufacturer of the 1992 Oldsmobile, but her lawsuit against GM was stayed when GM went bankrupt. This action is an attempt to hold Enterprise Rent-A-Car and its affiliates (Enterprise) liable as the corporate successor to the National Car Rental System Inc. (NCRS), the original lessor and seller of the car. I believe she is entitled to a trial. On both of the questions before us-strict liability, and corporate successor liability-I conclude that Enterprise failed to carry its burden as a summary judgment movant.

I. STRICT LIABILITY

If there was ever a textbook case in which the risk-spreading principles of strict liability under Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc. (1963) 59 Cal.2d 57 , 27 Cal.Rptr. 697 , 377 P.2d 897 ( Greenman ) and Vandermark v. Ford Motor Co. (1964) 61 Cal.2d 256 , 37 Cal.Rptr. 896 , 391 P.2d 168 ( Vandermark ) should…