Copenhagen Reinsurance Co. v. CHAMPION HOME BLDRS. CO.
Decision Date | 08 August 2003 |
Citation | 872 So.2d 848 |
Parties | COPENHAGEN REINSURANCE COMPANY, as subrogee of Addie P. Reed v. CHAMPION HOME BUILDERS COMPANY, INC. |
Court | Alabama Court of Civil Appeals |
Lawrence J. Seiter of Johnstone, Adams, Bailey, Gordon & Harris, L.L.C., Mobile, for appellant.
T. Julian Motes and Michael E. Gabel of Sirote & Permutt, P.C., Mobile, for appellee.
Copenhagen Reinsurance Company ("Copenhagen"), as subrogee of Addie P. Reed, deceased, appeals from the trial court's summary judgment in favor of Champion Home Builders Company, Inc. ("Champion"). We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.
Following a fire resulting in the destruction of a mobile home, Addie P. Reed, Beronica R. Farmer, and Copenhagen (sometimes collectively referred to as "the plaintiffs") sued Jack Lee, individually, and d/b/a Jack Lee Mobile Homes; Showplace Housing of Alabama, Inc. ("Showplace"); and Champion (sometimes collectively referred to as "the defendants"), seeking damages under the Alabama Extended Manufacturer's Liability Doctrine ("AEMLD") and alleging negligence and wantonness, breach of express and implied warranties, and breach of contract. The plaintiffs' complaint alleged that Reed and Farmer had purchased a new mobile home from Lee and Showplace and that, immediately after the mobile home was set up, they began to notice electrical problems with the mobile home, which they described in the complaint as the "lights going on and off." They further alleged that they had contacted Lee and Showplace on numerous occasions to report the problems, that the problems were never corrected, and that, approximately three weeks after the mobile home was set up, it was destroyed by a fire. Copenhagen had issued a policy of insurance on the mobile home; it paid Reed and Farmer $89,472 for their loss. Champion was identified as the manufacturer of the mobile home. Champion filed an answer to the plaintiffs' complaint.
Copenhagen filed a motion for a default judgment against Lee, individually, and d/b/a Jack Lee Mobile Homes, and Showplace, after they failed to file a responsive pleading. The trial court entered separate default judgments—one against Lee, individually; one against Lee d/b/a Jack Lee Mobile Homes; and one against Showplace—each in the amount of $89,472. On the motion of Champion, Reed was subsequently dismissed as a plaintiff after a suggestion of her death was filed and no proper substitution of parties occurred; Farmer was also dismissed as a result of her failure to comply with a discovery order. Copenhagen, the sole remaining plaintiff, filed an amended complaint with an additional count asserting that the defendants had violated the Magnuson-Moss Warranty-Federal Trade Commission Improvement Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2301 et seq. ("the Magnuson-Moss Act"). Champion filed an answer to the amended complaint.
Champion filed a motion for a summary judgment with a brief contending that it was due to be granted a judgment as a matter of law on the following grounds: (1) spoliation of evidence because Copenhagen had failed to preserve the remnants of the mobile home; (2) improper notice pursuant to the terms of the mobile home's warranty; (3) lack of privity between Champion, on the one hand, and Reed and Farmer, Copenhagen's insureds, on the other hand; and (4) improper notice of the Magnuson-Moss Act claim. Champion filed evidentiary materials in support of its summary judgment motion. Copenhagen filed a motion in opposition to Champion's motion for a summary judgment and also filed evidentiary material. Champion filed a response to Copenhagen's motion in opposition. After conducting a hearing on the motions, the trial court entered a summary judgment in favor of Champion, without stating a rationale. Copenhagen filed a notice of appeal to the supreme court, which transferred this case to this court, pursuant to § 12-2-7(6), Ala.Code 1975.
On appeal, Copenhagen contends that the trial court erred by entering a summary judgment in favor of Champion; in its brief to this court, Copenhagen addresses the grounds that Champion asserted in support of its motion for a summary judgment. Our review of a summary judgment is de novo.
Hobson v. American Cast Iron Pipe Co., 690 So.2d 341, 344 (Ala.1997).
Copenhagen first argues that not all of its claims were due to be dismissed because of spoliation of evidence. The pertinent facts relating to this issue, stated in a light most favorable to Copenhagen, Hobson, supra, are as follows. The mobile home was purchased in August 1998 and set up on September 30, 1998. Immediately after moving in, Farmer began noticing problems with the electrical system such as lights blinking on and off and some electrical outlets not working. Farmer called Lee on at least four occasions, resulting in one of Lee's employees unsuccessfully attempting to fix the electrical problem on one occasion. The mobile home was destroyed by a fire on October 20, 1998. The following morning, Farmer called Lee to tell him that the mobile home had been destroyed by a fire. Lee told Farmer that he would replace the mobile home, but he did not do so. Copenhagen hired two experts to investigate the fire scene in an effort to determine the cause of the fire. Larry Dewberry was the first to examine the fire scene on October 25, 1998; Dewberry was unable to determine the cause of the fire. Owen Posey then examined the fire scene on November 13, 1998; on November 23, 1998, Posey issued a report that stated, in pertinent part:
Some wiring and the receptacle-branch unit referred to in the report were kept by Posey. Both Dewberry and Posey took photographs of the fire scene during their investigations.
A few days after Posey issued his report, Copenhagen paid for the debris from the fire scene to be removed and discarded. The location of the discarded debris is unknown, leaving the wiring and the receptacle-branch unit kept by Posey as the only physical evidence remaining from the mobile home. Champion did not receive notice of the fire until the lawsuit was filed on August 14, 2000. In support of its motion for a summary judgment, Champion submitted an affidavit by Michael Southerland, its fire investigator, that stated, in pertinent part:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Tuscumbia City Sch. Sys. v. Pharmacia Corp.
...point, be sold to someone other than the original purchaser. See id. Defendant also relies on Copenhagen Reinsurance Co. v. Champion Home Builders Co., Inc., 872 So.2d 848 (Ala.Civ.App.2003). In that case, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals held that privity of contract was required for the......
-
Vesta Fire Ins. Corp. v. Milam & Co. Constr., Inc.
...Gas, Inc., 585 So.2d 822 (Ala.1991); Iverson v. Xpert Tune, Inc., 553 So.2d 82 (Ala.1989); and Copenhagen Reinsurance Co. v. Champion Home Builders Co., 872 So.2d 848 (Ala. Civ.App.2003), all discussed The record shows that in January 1997, pursuant to an agreement with Hollywood, A & M Bes......
-
Hartung Commercial Props., Inc. v. Buffi's Auto. Equip. & Supply Co.
...Inc., 585 So.2d 822 (Ala. 1991) ; Iverson v. Xpert Tune, Inc., 553 So.2d 82 (Ala. 1989) ; and Copenhagen Reinsurance Co. v. Champion Home Builders Co., 872 So.2d 848 (Ala. Civ. App. 2003)." Vesta Fire Ins. Corp. v. Milam & Co. Constr., 901 So.2d 84, 88–89 (Ala. 2004).Analysis This Court has......
-
Story v. RAJ Properties, Inc.
...Gas, Inc., 585 So.2d 822 (Ala.1991); Iverson v. Xpert Tune, Inc., 553 So.2d 82 (Ala.1989); and Copenhagen Reinsurance Co. v. Champion Home Builders Co., 872 So.2d 848 (Ala.Civ.App.2003). We first address Story's contention that a summary judgment was not proper because there is a genuine is......