By Thomas A.  Stoops
STOOPS, DENIOUS, WILSON & MURRAY, P.L.C.
            The recent  Arizona Supreme Court opinion in Flagstaff Affordable Housing, L.P.  v. Design Alliance, Inc., CV-09-0117-PR, clarified the application  of the “economic loss doctrine” which bars plaintiffs in certain  circumstances from recovering economic damages in tort. The Supreme  Court noted that it had previously applied the economic loss doctrine  only in products liability cases but now extended it to construction  defect cases, and held that a property owner is limited to contractual  remedies when an architect’s negligent design causes economic loss but  no physical injury to persons or other property. The Supreme Court  catalogued a number of confusing and apparently inconsistent holdings  dealing with the application of the economic loss doctrine and attempted  to clarify its application. The Court extended the economic loss  doctrine to design professionals in construction defect cases, observing  that it had not addressed the issue of economic loss doctrine since the  1984 case of Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power  District v. Westinghouse Electric Corp., 143 Ariz. 368, 694 P.2d 198  (1984). 
Because of a good deal of confusion about the  definition of the “economic loss doctrine” the Supreme Court began by  clarifying terminology. The Court’s definition of economic loss is...READ THE REST BY CLICKING HERE
No comments:
Post a Comment