Election Section

SAN FRANCISCO — Homeowners cannot sue construction companies for negligence anymore, unless building code violations or other defects cause injury or economic loss, the California Supreme Court decided Monday. 

The 5-2 decision says homeowners can recover the cost of repairing building code violations or other defects that cause damage only during the warranty time on a new home, from one to 10 years. 

Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar wrote that even though building codes require that walls be built to reduce damage during an earthquake or strong wind, it doesn’t mean “any given defect is sufficiently grave to pose a realistic risk of structural failure.” 

Chief Justice Ronald M. George disagreed with part of the decision, saying the Legislature should change the law to protect homeowners from dangerous construction. 

“California is prone to earthquakes, and, tragically, the negligent construction of residential housing almost surely will result in the deaths and injury of numerous current and future residents of this state,” he wrote. 

But an attorney who represented San Diego residents in the case says the decision will ultimately hurt homeowners. 

“For all the people who are not the original owners and encounter some kind of life safety problem ... they are now disenfranchised,” said lawyer Steven M. Strauss. “They don’t have a remedy.” 

Another lawyer said the court’s decision will likely make homeowners less likely to search for defects because they cannot get reimbursed for the damages, and they will not want to disclose those defects to future buyers. 

But attorneys representing the building industry said most lawsuits are filed over minor defects that will never cause major damage. 

“Spending millions of dollars to correct technical defects ... is something of an economic waste,” said Gregory L. Dillon, a Newport Beach lawyer who defended major home builder, The William Lyon Co., in the case. 

The Supreme Court based Monday’s decision in part on a 1965 ruling limiting a manufacturer’s liability to physical injuries in a negligence lawsuit. 

The case was brought by owners of a San Diego condominium project and a single-family housing development. They wanted compensation for building code violations that included improperly connected walls and inadequate fire protection insulation. 

A trial court and a Court of Appeal had ruled the residents were barred from suing for negligence unless defects caused damage. 

In a dissent, Supreme Court Justice Stanley Mosk said he regretted the court did not create even a “minimal safeguard” for homeowners.