The case was favorably resolved against one of the defendants, but Hilti moved for summary judgment, arguing that there was no evidence supporting the required elements of duty and causation. The trial court granted the motion. Gutierrez and Perez appealed, and the Georgia Court of Appeals reversed. The Court of Appeals held that the trial court erred by concluding that no genuine issues of material facts remained. On behalf of Gutierrez and his wife, Mr. Chapar and his co-counsel convinced the Georgia Court of Appeals that evidence existed that Hilti sold the wrong tool in spite of a duty of care to sell the proper tool for installation. The court further held that summary judgment was inappropriate where the evidence supported the plaintiffs’ position that the improper installation caused the failure of the anchors and thus Gutierrez’s injuries. The Court of Appeals ruled that a jury was should determine whether the intervening improper installation was the cause of the failure of the anchors.
The case is Gutierrez v. Hilti, Inc. and may be read here.