Dixie Roofing v. Allen Parish Sch. Bd.

Citations: 690 So. 2d 49; 1996 WL 230796Docket: 95-1526, 95-1527

Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal; May 8, 1996; Louisiana; State Appellate Court

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

Dixie Roofing Company of Pineville, Inc. appealed a judgment from the Louisiana Court of Appeal in favor of the Allen Parish School Board regarding a defective roof installed at Oakdale Elementary School. The original roof, built in 1979, began leaking, prompting the Board to sue the initial contractor and roofer, leading to a settlement used to fund a new roof. Dixie Roofing was contracted on July 3, 1985, for $183,835 to remove the old roof and replace it with a new roof using EPDM RubberGard, manufactured by Firestone Tire and Rubber Company. The contract mandated adherence to Firestone's installation specifications, including the use of approved materials.

During construction, heavy rains in November 1985 caused significant leaks, damaging the school. Firestone claimed the leaks were due to Dixie's use of non-approved cement. After completing the roof in July 1986, the Board’s architect identified necessary corrections before Firestone would issue a warranty, which was granted on September 5, 1986, after corrections were made. Despite this, leaks continued, and Dixie’s repair attempts were unsuccessful, leading the Board to withhold payment and hire another roofer for repairs in 1990 and 1991.

Dixie initiated a declaratory judgment action in June 1987 regarding responsibility for the damage from the 1985 rainstorm. In February 1990, the Board sued Dixie for breach of contract, claiming non-compliance with specifications and poor workmanship. The Board later amended its petition to include Firestone for breach of warranty. After a trial in July 1994, the court found both Dixie and Firestone jointly liable for $339,702.61, plus costs and interest, determining that Dixie failed to prevent leaks as guaranteed in their contract, partly due to defective installation. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment.

The trial court determined that the RubberGard roofing membrane had redhibitory defects for which Firestone, the manufacturer, is accountable. Both Firestone and Dixie have appealed this judgment. Firestone claims it cannot face a redhibitory action for several reasons: 

1. Its warranty explicitly excludes liability for redhibitory defects.
2. As the manufacturer of a component part, it argues it cannot be liable for the entire construction.
3. Firestone asserts it did not make any quality representations that the School Board relied on, negating a redhibitory action.
4. Any potential redhibitory action has prescribed.
5. The evidence does not sufficiently support a finding of a redhibitory defect.

Firestone insists that its warranty waives liability for redhibitory defects and argues that the trial court's omission of this waiver in its judgment necessitates a de novo review. However, the lack of discussion on every defense does not constitute reversible error and implies a rejection of that defense. 

The warranty was not part of the original contract between Dixie and the School Board, and Firestone acknowledges that its issuance was contingent on the construction's completion and approval. Louisiana law requires a valid warranty waiver to be written clearly, included in sales documents, and communicated to the buyer; thus, the warranty does not restrict the School Board's right to seek damages.

Firestone contends it cannot be liable because it did not manufacture or sell the roof itself but only the roofing materials. It cites the case of Pittman v. Kaiser Aluminum, where a manufacturer of wiring components was not held liable due to the absence of a vendor/vendee relationship. However, the facts of this case are more akin to Aizpurua v. Crane Pool Co. Inc., where a manufacturer was held liable for defective pool liners, allowing a redhibitory action for breach of implied warranty.

Lastly, Firestone argues it did not make representations regarding product quality, thus negating a redhibitory claim. This assertion is contradicted by evidence, as Firestone had communicated confidence in its roofing solution to the School Board’s architects, indicating it would resolve issues of blistering and leaks.

The letter attached to the contract indicated that the School Board was influenced by Firestone's representations about its roofing system, leading to the conclusion that the School Board agreed to purchase the Firestone Rubber-Gard roofing. Firestone contended that it was not notified of any roof leaks until 1989, asserting that any claims against it were time-barred by the expiration of the warranty in September 1987. According to La. Civ. Code art. 2534, a redhibitory action prescribes one year after the sale or discovery of a defect, unless the seller is in bad faith. The trial court found that the School Board provided opportunities for repairs, as evidenced by Dixie Roofing's repair of four leaks in 1987 and Firestone’s authorization of Atlas Roofing for repairs. Atlas Roofing, however, determined that the problem was too severe for them to address, and no repairs were made. The School Board filed suit against Dixie Roofing on April 10, 1990, later adding Firestone as a defendant. The court ruled that the School Board should not be penalized for attempting to resolve the issues before filing suit, aligning with jurisprudence that states prescription does not begin until repair attempts are abandoned. Consequently, the School Board's claims against Firestone did not prescribe. Firestone also argued that the evidence was insufficient to establish a redhibitory defect. However, Louisiana law allows a consumer to pursue a redhibition claim against a manufacturer without needing privity of contract, and a defect can be proven through direct or circumstantial evidence. Manufacturers are presumed to know of product defects, and false representations regarding product qualities can lead to redhibition claims. Ultimately, the determination of a redhibitory defect is a factual question for the trial court, subject to review only for manifest error.

The trial judge determined that the Firestone RubberGard Roofing System was defective due to shrinkage, which has caused over fifty leaks in four years, resulting in water damage. Expert witnesses Louis Brown and Steven Kinel confirmed that the roof's defects, primarily caused by membrane shrinkage, are characteristic of this roofing type and prevalent in the industry. A letter from Firestone to the Allen Parish School Board's architect indicated confidence in the roofing solution, which proved unfounded. Allen Parish School Board representative Mr. Smith stated that knowledge of the roof's significant leaks would have deterred the purchase. The judge referenced established case law indicating that a leaking roof is deemed defective. The expert opinions suggested that shrinkage likely began shortly after installation but became apparent only after significant deterioration occurred. The trial court found it unnecessary for the plaintiff to prove the exact cause of the defect, only that it existed at the time of sale. The court upheld that the roof failed to perform as intended under normal conditions, leading to the conclusion that the roofing system was indeed defective.

Dixie Roofing is found liable for damages incurred by the School Board due to a defective Firestone Roofing System, as the court rules that Dixie Roofing's negligence significantly contributed to exacerbating the roof's defects. The court cites precedent, stating that a negligent seller cannot escape liability merely due to defects in the product sold, especially if negligent repairs worsen the situation. Both Firestone and Dixie Roofing contest the trial court's damage award as excessive, arguing their liability should be limited to repairing existing leaks rather than replacing the entire roof. Firestone points out the case was decided on redhibition grounds but damages were awarded under a breach of contract theory, which typically aims to restore the plaintiff to the position they would have been in if the contract was fulfilled. The court acknowledges that while damages in redhibition usually cover repair costs, if a full replacement is necessary to address the defects, those costs are valid. The trial court found that replacement was required, supported by expert testimony indicating that partial repairs would likely not resolve ongoing issues with the roof. Consequently, the court upholds the trial court's decision regarding the necessity of replacing the roof and the award of consequential damages to the School Board.

Firestone's warranty explicitly denies liability for consequential damages; however, under Louisiana law, since the warranty was not part of the contract, it does not limit the School Board's right to recover damages, which includes water damage to carpets, tiles, and books. The School Board is entitled to recover these damages as supported by case law. Both defendants challenge the trial court's award of attorney fees, arguing that the School Board lacked a claim in redhibition, but this argument is rejected as attorney fees are permitted under redhibition statutes and were agreed upon by all parties.

Dixie Roofing contends the trial court erred in holding it and Firestone solidarily liable, based on the incorrect assumption that this is not a redhibition case. It is clarified that under Louisiana Civil Code article 1797, vendors and manufacturers of defective products can be solidary obligors. The trial court's decision to impose solidary liability on Dixie Roofing and Firestone is upheld.

Dixie Roofing also claims the trial court incorrectly awarded Firestone a credit of $19,383.50, which the School Board initially withheld from the contract price. This claim is agreed upon, as Firestone was fully compensated by Dixie for material purchases. Consequently, the judgment is amended to provide this credit solely to Dixie Roofing. The judgment is affirmed in all other respects, with appeal costs shared equally between Firestone and Dixie Roofing.