Winkel v. Windsor Windows & Doors
| Docket Number: | 2007-CA-01383-SCT | |
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 06-12-2008 Opinion Author: WALLER, P.J. Holding: Reversed and Remanded |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Property damage - Statute of repose - Section 15-1-41 - Application to manufacturers Judge(s) Concurring: SMITH, C.J., DIAZ, P.J., EASLEY, CARLSON, GRAVES, DICKINSON, RANDOLPH AND LAMAR, JJ. Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - PROPERTY DAMAGE |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 07-16-2007 Appealed from: Coahoma County Circuit Court Judge: Al Smith Disposition: The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Windsor Windows and Doors. Case Number: 14-CI-02-0179-ABS-W |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | BERNIE WINKEL AND RACHEL WINKEL |
DANA J. SWAN |
|
|
| Appellee: | WINDSOR WINDOWS AND DOORS | WILLIAM O. LUCKETT, JR. | ||
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Property damage - Statute of repose - Section 15-1-41 - Application to manufacturers |
| Summary of the Facts: | Bernie and Rachel Winkel filed suit against a window manufacturer, a synthetic stucco producer, and a contractor who installed the stucco exterior at their residence. The window manufacturer, Windsor Windows and Doors, moved the circuit court for summary judgment. The court granted the motion for summary judgment, and the Winkels appeal. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | The Winkels moved into their new home in March 1995. After several years passed, they noticed water was infiltrating the home’s exterior, damaging the house. They filed suit against Windsor Windows, among other defendants, alleging the windows installed in their home were defective and contributed to the damage to the house. Their original complaint was filed on December 31, 2002. The court held that the claims against Windsor Windows were subject to the six-year statute of repose, and the time for bringing the claims expired prior to December 31, 2002. The Winkels argue that Windsor Windows, a manufacturer, fell outside the class of entities covered by section 15-1-41, the statute of repose. In McIntyre v. Farrel Corp., 680 So. 2d 858, 862-63, 866 (Miss. 1996), the Court concluded that the Legislature did not intend for manufacturers to be within the protected class of parties under this statute of repose. The evidence in the record in this case does not demonstrate Windsor Windows either supplied windows designed specifically for the Winkels’ home or furnished specific instructions for the windows’ installation into the Winkels’ home. On the contrary, the evidence in the record indicates the windows were mass-produced, and the instructions generally indicated how to install the windows into stucco homes in general. Therefore, the trial court erred in finding Windsor Windows covered under section 15-1-41 as an entity which designs or plans the construction of an improvement to real property. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
