Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Erlich v. Menezes

Supreme Court of California
981 P.2d 978 (1999)


Facts

The Erlichs (plaintiffs) entered into a contract with Menezes (defendant) to build their home. The Erlichs moved into their home December of 1990. In February 1991, it rained heavily and the Erlichs’ home began leaking. Walls became saturated in an upstairs bedroom, two downstairs bedrooms, and the pool room. The living room filled with three inches of standing water and water poured in streams in several different locations in the house. The garage ceiling became saturated and the plaster liquefied and fell to the floor. Menezes attempted to repair the leaks, but was unsuccessful. The Erlichs had their home inspected by a general contractor and structural engineer who, in addition to confirming defects leading to the leakage, found several structural problems with the home. Mr. Erlich testified he was “absolutely sick” and suffered a heart attack after finding out about the problems with the home. Mr. Erlich suffered from a heart condition prior to the construction of the home. Mrs. Erlich testified that she feared for the safety of her family. The Erlichs filed suit under theories of fraud and negligent misrepresentation. The jury found that Menezes negligently breached the contract. The jury awarded damages for breach, as well as emotional distress damages. Menezes appealed. The Court of Appeal affirmed the decision of the trial court. Menezes appealed to the Supreme Court of California.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Brown, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 175,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.