 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Jones v. Hyatt Insurance Agency.12/8/1999
iability. This intimate nexus is satisfied by contractual privity or its equivalent. By contrast, where the risk created is one of personal injury, no such direct relationship need be shown, and the principal determinant of duty becomes foreseeability." (Footnote omitted).
In the case at bar, the Joneses incurred "a risk of economic loss only" as a result of Hyatt's negligent breach of contract. The Joneses' personal injuries did not result from Hyatt's negligence but were caused by the negligence of K&D;s employee. The only injury possibly incurred by the Joneses as a result of Hyatt's negligence is that their judgment against K&D;may not be satisfied. This is economic loss only.
Moreover, there was no "intimate nexus" or "direct relationship" between Hyatt and the Joneses. At the time of the contract between Hyatt and K&D; the Joneses were not even identified third-party beneficiaries of that contract. It was not until the motor vehicle accident that the Joneses fell into a class whose members were among the intended beneficiaries of the contract. See Napier v. Bertram, 191 Ariz. 238, 954 P.2d 1389 (1998), where the Supreme Court of Arizona held that an insurance agent may not be held liable in negligence to a taxicab passenger for failure to procure uninsured motorist coverage for the agent's client, a taxicab company required by state law to have such coverage on behalf of its passengers. The Arizona court noted that, for it to hold a professional liable for negligence, it traditionally required "a duty of care" founded upon the "relationship between the non-client and professional" that "exceeded mere general foreseeability." Napier, 191 Ariz. at 242-243, 954 P.2d 1393-1394.
Consequently, under the principles set forth in Jacques v. First Nat'l Bank, supra, and other cases, the defendants' breach of their contract with K&D;violated no tort duty owed to the Joneses.
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS AFFIRMED. PETITIONERS TO PAY COST.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Maryland Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|