Our previous three blog posts focused on negligence claims between non-contracting parties for purely economic losses. The distinction between economic loss and non-economic loss is important because: (1) contracting parties are barred from bringing tort claims for purely economic losses, Flagstaff Affordable Housing, LP v. […]
Our last post, Economic Damages and Contractual Privity Pt. II: Have Donnelly Negligence Claims Survived?, discussed how Cal-Am dicta stated there are situations where public policy duties between contractor claimants and designers can arise out of Restatement (Third) of Torts ยง 6 . These situations […]
Our last post, Economic Damages and Contractual Privity: Cutting Out the Middle-Man, discussed two cases seemingly reaching different outcomes when claimants lacking privity asserted negligence claims against designers. In the Donnelly case, the lack of privity posed no obstacle, while in the Cal-Am case, lack […]
In both Donnelly v. Oberg/Hunt/Gilleland and Cal-Am v. Edais Engineering, a third-party claimant brought negligence claims against a design professional for purely economic harm. In each case, the claimant lacked contractual privity with the designer. However, in one case, the lack of contractual privity proved […]