This is the old version of the H2O platform and is now read-only. This means you can view content but cannot create content. You can access the new platform at https://opencasebook.org. Thank you.
Purely economic harm has faced barriers similar to purely emotional harm: without a physical hook, such cases fail at the outset. Here the policy reasons behind the barrier may emphasize the unbounded nature of liability – too many negligent acts implicate the affairs of too many people, in ways that other elements of negligence (such as the proximate cause limitations we will learn about) might not be able to well contain.
In this refreshingly brief section, we look to see how some courts have handled pleas for exceptions to a bar on purely economic harm.
EDIT PLAYLIST INFORMATION DELETE PLAYLISTEdit playlist item notes below to have a mix of public & private notes, or:
MAKE ALL NOTES PUBLIC (0/3 playlist item notes are public) MAKE ALL NOTES PRIVATE (3/3 playlist item notes are private)1 | Show/Hide More | People Express Airlines, Inc. v. Consolidated Rail Corp.--"The Evacuated Airport" |
2 | Show/Hide More | Koch v. Consolidated Edison Co. -- "The New York Blackout Case" |
3 | Show/Hide More | Strauss v. Belle Realty Co. -- "The Man who Tripped Down the Stairs" |
Find Items |
Search below to find items, then drag and drop items onto playlists you own. To add items to nested playlists, you must first expand those playlists.
This is the old version of the H2O platform and is now read-only. This means you can view content but cannot create content. If you would like access to the new version of the H2O platform and have not already been contacted by a member of our team, please contact us at h2o@cyber.law.harvard.edu. Thank you.