Publication Date
Winter 2012
Journal
DePaul Law Review
Abstract
The article explores the evolution and challenges of pure economic loss doctrine in American tort law, focusing on the contrasting approaches of Robert Rabin and Gary Schwartz. While Schwartz critiques the feasibility of a general theory due to the diversity of economic injuries, Rabin advocates for a nuanced, fact-specific approach. The article highlights the ad hoc nature of the doctrine, as seen in key cases like JAire Corp. v. Gregory and Aas v. Superior Court, which reflect shifting judicial attitudes toward negligence and liability. It concludes that the failure to establish a coherent principle for determining duty underscores the ongoing struggles in defining the boundaries of pure economic loss.
Volume
61
Issue
2
First Page
615
Last Page
642
Publisher
DePaul University College of Law
Disciplines
Law | Law and Economics | Legal History | Torts
Recommended Citation
Anthony J. Sebok,
The Failed Promise of a General Theory of Pure Economic Loss: An Accident of History?,
61
DePaul L. Rev.
615
(2012).
https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/faculty-articles/1495
Included in
Law and Economics Commons, Legal History Commons, Torts Commons
Comments
Symposium: Festschrift for Robert Rabin: Seventeenth Annual Clifford Symposium on Tort Law and Social Policy