State of California ex rel. Campfield v. Safelite Group CA1/4

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 29, 2024A168101California5,326 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

Because this appeal comes to us after the trial court sustained Safelite’s demurrer without leave to amend, we draw the relevant facts from the complaint. (Wilson v. Hynek (2012) 207 Cal.App.4th 999, 1002.) Campfield owns a windshield repair company that licenses and sells products for repairing vehicle windshield cracks. Safelite is the nation’s largest retailer of vehicle glass repair and replacement services. Safelite also serves as the third party administrator for over 175 insurance and fleet companies, including 23 of the top 30 insurers in California and the country, for processing and adjusting policyholders’ vehicle glass damage claims, and it has direct electronic access to over 20 insurance company databases.1 Beginning in the 1970s, the windshield repair industry believed it was infeasible to repair cracks longer than six inches and that such a crack required replacement of the windshield. Consistent with this belief, for years Safelite used this rule in its marketing materials. In 2005, an industry standards committee that included Campfield and a Safelite employee adopted a standard allowing repair of cracks up to and including 14 inches long. The…

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.