t***r
发帖数: 264 | 1 Economic Loss Doctrine Bars Claim against Engineer Individually
Author: Kent Holland
See similar articles: Contract Privity | Economic Loss Doctrine | Engineers
Seal | Implied Warranty | Individual Liability | Standard of Care | Virginia
law
By J. Kent Holland, Esq.
ConstructionRisk Counsel, PLLC
Where a project owner filed suit against both the engineering firm, and the
individual engineer that designed a post foundation for a fabric-roofed farm
building, the negligence action against the individual engineer was
dismissed based on the economic loss doctrine as applied under Virginia law.
The plaintiff asserted claims against the engineer individually for
breach of professional standard of care and breach of implied warranty –
contending that he was personally liable because he attached his engineer's
seal to the design plans and failed to comply with the standard of care for
licensed professionals. In addition to applying the economic loss rule, the
court dismissed the implied warranty claim because there was no privity of
contract between the plaintiff and engineer that could give rise to a
warranty. McConnell v. Servinsky Engineering, 2014 WL 2094131 (W.D. Va.
2014).
The court began its analysis by noting that the economic loss rule holds
that when the bargained-for-level of quality in a contract is not met, “the
law of contracts provides the sole remedy.” The court noted “Tort
recovery is not available because the contract defines the breach and the
damages. Additionally, the harm causing economic loss is not one that
traditionally sounds in tort.” Further, concluded the court, “Because
the law of contracts provides the sole remedy for economic loss under
Virginia law, privity is an indispensable requirement for a viable claim.”
In this case, because there was no privity of contract between the plaintiff
and the individual engineer who had merely executed the contract as
principle of the engineering company, the plaintiff could not recover
economic loss from the individual. The outcome remains the same even if the
individual engineer performed the design services because Virginia Supreme
precedent holds that “in the absence of privity, a person cannot be held
liable for economic damages caused by his negligence in the performance of a
contract.”
The court also rejected plaintiff's argument that the engineer assumed legal
duties beyond the contract by affixing his professional engineering seal to
the plans. No such independent tort duty was created by affixing the seal
or providing professional service. In this regard, the court stated that
the supreme court of Virginia “has repeatedly held that a claim for breach
of professional duties is properly brought as breach of contract claim.”
On the question of whether there could be a viable claim for breach of
implied warranty, the court concluded that such a claim is not distinct from
a claim for breach of contract, because any implied warranties must arise
out of the contract. Since the plaintiff lacks privity of contract with the
engineer, there can be no breach of contract or breach of implied warranty
under a contract. | b*******g
发帖数: 1095 | 2 房子倒了？
Engineers
Virginia
the
farm
【在 t***r 的大作中提到】
: Economic Loss Doctrine Bars Claim against Engineer Individually
: Author: Kent Holland
: See similar articles: Contract Privity | Economic Loss Doctrine | Engineers
: Seal | Implied Warranty | Individual Liability | Standard of Care | Virginia
: law
: By J. Kent Holland, Esq.
: ConstructionRisk Counsel, PLLC
: Where a project owner filed suit against both the engineering firm, and the
: individual engineer that designed a post foundation for a fabric-roofed farm
: building, the negligence action against the individual engineer was
|
|
