N&D proudly announces that the California Supreme Court has unanimously agreed with our position and has ruled in support of the Right to Repair Act. 

The Supreme Court has spoken: The Legislature said what it meant, and meant what it said. In its decision in McMillin v. Superior Court (Van Tassell), the California Supreme Court confirmed that the Right to Repair Act is “the exclusive means of recovery for damages identified in [SB800] absent an express exception,” such as contract, warranty, and fraud. The Supreme Court held that even if a plaintiff tries to plead around SB800, the builder can still enforce the right to repair. The Supreme Court disapproved Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Brookfield Crystal Cove LLC (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 98, in which a lower court had held that the Right to Repair Act was never intended to supplant common law causes of action like negligence and strict liability.