A.J. Decoster Co. v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “generally, the only recovery for a purely economic loss would be under a contract theory.”
• permitting recovery for replacement costs of chickens killed by a defective electrical switch
• “the truth of all well-pleaded relevant and material facts as well as all inferences that reasonably can be drawn therefrom” must be assumed
• “Because Decoster failed to raise the issue of the sufficiency of Westinghouse’s affidavit below, we decline now to consider it.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).