|
535
Madison Ave. Gourmet Foods, Inc. v. Finlandia Ctr. Inc. (2001)
Pg. 544
750 N.E.2d 1097 (N.Y. 2001)
Author: VanderBucks
Parties:
Appellant – Plaintiff – Gourmet Foods
Appellee - Defendant – Finlandia Ctr.
Court:
Supreme Court of New York, 2001
Facts:
A wall partially collapsed from a 39-story office tower in
downtown Manhattan. All the bricks and mortar fell on Madison
Avenue causing the closure of 15 blocks for two weeks and some
businesses remained closed for longer (5 weeks). The collapse was
caused by a construction project drilling 94 holes for windows in
the building that aggravated existing structural defects.
Plaintiffs are suing for economic loss for not being able to stay
open and losing business.
Procedural
Posture:
TC – dismissed plaintiff’s negligence claims because of
the following:
1. Defendants owed no duty of care of purely economic loss in
absence of personal injury or property damage.
2. The public nuisance claims on the grounds that the injuries
were the same in kind as those suffered by all of the business in
the community.
MC – Reversed two of the three cases by reinstating
negligence and public nuisance claims on the grounds that the
defendants’ duty to keep premise in reasonably safe
condition, and it was reasonably foreseen to cause injury if not.
(Proximate cause).
Issue: Can
a plaintiff recover for purely economic loss without suffering
personal injury or property damage?
-NO-
Judgment:
Reversed MC’s on the two cases, and Affirmed on the third
case.
Holding: The
court ruled that economic loss alone without personal injury or
property damage can not entitle a plaintiff relief. It would open
a Pandora’s Box of litigation which could extend to
unlimited liability.
Relevant
Rule: A plaintiff can not recover for economic loss
alone if there is no existence of personal injury or property
damage accompanying the claim.
|
