Lisa Petrillo, Plaintiff-Respondent v. William G. Bachenberg, Jr.; William G. Bachenberg, Jr.

Summary

The Supreme Court of New Jersey affirmed the Appellate Division’s reversal, holding that an attorney who prepares and transmits a composite percolation‑test report for a seller owes a duty of care to a prospective buyer not to provide misleading information when the attorney knows or should know the buyer will rely on it. The Court reasoned that the duty arises from the attorney’s role in the transaction and the foreseeability of reliance, and that a jury may find negligence. A concurrence noted the limited factual context, while a dissent argued the duty is too broad and unsupported by the record.