Conforti & Eisele, Inc. v. John C. Morris Assocs.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that “a design professional [is] answerable in tort to a contractor who sustains economic damages as a result of the negligence of the design professional in the absence of privity of contract”
• imposing the duty upon a \design professional\ apparently upon the sole ground of his status, but with stated assumptions which may indicate an unarticulated reliance upon the cause of action, based upon the affirmative and voluntary assumption of a duty, set out in Restatement (Second
• imposing the duty upon a “design professional” apparently upon the sole ground of his status, but with stated assumptions which may indicate an unarticulated reliance upon the cause of action, based upon the affirmative and voluntary assumption of a duty, set out in Restatement (Second
• lack of contractual privity does not bar tort action against engineers and architects for negligent design
• lack of contractual privity does not bar tort action against engineers and architects for negligent design

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).