Tiara Condominium Association, Inc. v. Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.

Summary

Justice Canady, dissenting, would retain the economic loss rule for parties in contractual privity and reject the majority's limitation of that rule to products-liability cases. He reasoned that the rule protects negotiated allocations of economic risk and prevents contract claims from being recast as tort claims. Chief Justice Polston, dissenting, likewise would answer the certified question in the negative, while Justice Pariente, concurring, defended limiting the rule to products-liability cases on the ground that ordinary contract principles independently restrict duplicative tort remedies.