 |
|
|
|
        |
   History of the Case
This class action involves exterior hardboard siding, manufactured by Stimson Lumber Company and marketed as Forestex Hardboard Siding. The class action was brought on behalf of all property owners with Forestex siding installed on their properties. The operative class time period is from 1985 to 1996.
The complaint alleges that Stimson marketed this Forestex as a long-term durable siding product and that it would "shed water like a duck". The complaint alleges that the siding absorbs water, swells, breaks, warps and generally deteriorates.
The initial complaint was filed in California, and subsequently another complaint was filed in the state of Washington. All actions are being vigorously litigated. Class certification was granted by the court in Washington on June 8, 2001. The certification order is partially set forth as follows:
History of the Case
1. The Court orders certification of the following class in this action pursuant to CR23(b)(3): All persons in the states of Washington, Oregon, California, Idaho, Utah, Colorado and Hawaii who own or have owned buildings clad with Stimson Series 400 or Series 500 hardboard siding ("Forestex hardboard siding") installed after January 1, 1985.
2. Plaintiffs Joy Ann Gardener and Robert Blangeres shall serve as Class Representatives. The firms of Berding & Weil LLP, Sandler Ahern & McConaughy PLLC, Levy Ram Olson & Rossi LLP, and Cunningham, Bounds, Yance, Crowder & Brown are appointed as Class Counsel.
3. The Court presumes the allegations of the complaint to be true. Washington Educ. Assn. V. Shelton Sch. Dist. No. 309, 93 Wn.2d 783, 613 P.2d 769 (1980); Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin, 417 U.S. 156, 40 L.Bd.2d732,94 S.Ct.2140 (1974). The only issue on this motion is whether the claims alleged befit class treatment.
4. A class action may be the only feasible means to resolve claims where a defendant inflicts economic injury on a large number of persons for whom pursuit of costly and complex litigation on an individual basis is not economically feasible. E.G., Brown v. Brown, 6 Wn. App. 249, 492 P.2d.581 (1971):
[A] primary function of the class suit is to provide a procedure for vindicating claims which,taken individually, are too small to justify individual legal action but which are of significant size and importance if taken as a group.
|
