Appellant car buyer challenged a judgment of the Superior Court of Santa Clara County (California), which sustained, without leave to amend, respondent car seller’s demurrer to the buyer’s complaint that asserted a cause of action for negligent infliction of emotional distress. A judgment of dismissal was entered as to the buyer because negligent infliction of emotional distress was her only cause of action.
California Business Lawyer & Corporate Lawyer, Inc. has a template for a Breach of Contract demand letter
Overview
The buyer’s sister was driving the car and was involved in an accident resulting in fatal injuries allegedly due to the vehicle’s allegedly defective head protection system. The buyer was not a passenger in the vehicle and did not witness the accident. The buyer claimed that she was entitled to recover emotional distress damages because she was the direct victim of the seller’s alleged negligence in failing to use due care in the design and manufacture of her vehicle’s head protection system. In affirming, the court held that the seller owed no duty to the buyer that would allow her to recover for emotional distress on the theory that she, as the owner of the vehicle, was the direct victim of the seller’s alleged negligence. Because the buyer was neither driving the car nor present at the time of the accident involving her family members, the seller owed no manufacturer’s or seller’s duty of care to her. The law did not impose a duty on the seller to avoid negligently causing emotional distress to owners of the seller’s vehicles, such as the buyer, who lent their vehicles to close family members who were then injured out of the owner’s presence while using the defective vehicle.
Outcome
The court affirmed the trial court’s judgment.
