Barber v. Selsky

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that water damage resulting from failed waterproofing was “a purely economic loss” and did not “constitute an ‘injury to property’ within the meaning of CPLR 1401”
• finding that economic loss in the form of water damage resulting from the breach of contract between general contractor and subcontractor without any allegation of personal injury does not constitute an “injury to property” under CPLR 1401
• finding that economic loss in the form of water damage resulting from the breach of contract between general contractor and subcontractor without any allegation of personal injury does not constitute an “injury to property” under CPLR 1401

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).