Scott & Fetzer Co. v. Montgomery Ward & Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that construction activity that resulted in a “sudden and dangerous conflagration” at a warehouse was a calamitous event (emphasis omitted)
• holding that Moorman did not bar tort claim based on defective fire-warning system that led to damages from fire spreading through a warehouse and causing extensive property damages
• confirming that the lower court’s finding of foreseeability of damages and consideration of relevant policy factors was proper in finding duty
• reaffirming Moor-man, and distinguishing it from case where property was consequentially damaged as a result of defective product; property owners were not purchasers of defective product, but were by-standers
• finding the economic loss doctrine did not apply where the defendant supplied a defective fire alarm system
• finding the economic loss doctrine did not apply where the defendant supplied a defective fire alarm system

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).