Economic Harm Flashcards
Nycal v. KPMG
[RS Approach to determining liability of an accountant] An accountant who performs his duties negligently may be liable to third parties with whom he is not in a contractual relationship, if the accountant had actual knowledge of the limited groups of potential parties who would rely on his work and actual knowledge of the particular transaction his work was designed to influence.
LAN/STV v. Martin Eby Construction Co
[Architect and general contractor - Economic loss rule: In actions for unintentional torts, the common law has long restricted recovery of purely economic damages unaccompanied by injury to the plaintiff or his property] The availability of contractual remedies must preclude tort recovery in the situation generally because, contracts provide for improved clarity, and clarity allows parties to do business on a surer footing. The reasons for the economic loss rule support its application in this case to preclude a general contractor from recovering delay damages from the owner’s architect.
So Cal Gas v. Superior Court of LA
[Gas leak - exception to the general rule of no recovery for negligently inflicted purely economic losses is where the plaintiff and the defendant have a ‘special relationship’ which is not found here (plaintiff was an intended beneficiary of a particular transaction but was harmed by the defendant’s negligence in carrying it out - like between a notary and beneficiary or a restaurant and contractor). Chooses not to place a temporal or spatial (unless there is an evacuation area set in stone) rule in play in order to cabin claims due to arbitrariness.
