Torts — Economic Loss Doctrine

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Civil

Torts — Economic Loss Doctrine

The economic loss doctrine does not bar tort claims when the loss is to “other property.”

“There is no evidence that, as part of its function as a water softener, the water softener was ‘expected and intended to interact with’ the drywall, flooring, and woodwork that was damaged in this case. See Grams, 283 Wis. 2d 511, ¶47. The water softener is not alleged to have damaged property as a result of not providing adequate softening of the home’s water. By focusing on the foreseeability of a malfunction in the process that the water softener uses to treat water, Hague ignores the requirement of the disappointed expectations test that the defect be related to the purpose of the product’s purchase. The purpose of buying a water softener is to soften one’s water. Tort recovery is not precluded in this action as the water softener was not expected, nor intended, to interact with the drywall, flooring, and woodwork of Krueger’s home. Further, the cause of the damage to the home’s drywall, flooring, and woodwork did not stem from a disappointment in how Krueger and Hague expected the water softener to function in softening Krueger’s water.”

Reversed and Remanded.

Recommended for publication in the official reports.

2012AP392 State Farm Fire & Casualty co. v. Hague Quality Water, International

Dist. II, Sheboygan County, Bolgert, J., Reilly, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Weiss, Monte, Milwaukee; Kramer, Charles W., Milwaukee; For Respondent: Gehring, Jason P., Milwaukee