Stapleton v. Jack Cushman Drilling & Pump Co.
153 Idaho 735
| Idaho | 2012Background
- Aug. 2006 oral contract to drill a residential well; well completed Aug. 2006; house built later with landscaping; Jan. 2007 sediment in water and low pressure identified; Fall 2010 well caves in; Apr. 6, 2011 suit for negligence and breach of contract filed; district court granted summary judgment on statute of limitations and did not reach economic loss rule; on appeal, court affirms for breach-barred and negligence barred by economic loss rule.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| When does the contract claim accrue under 5-241? | Stapleton argues accrual later than completion; disputes final completion date. | Cushman argues accrual at completion in August 2006. | Accrual at final completion (Aug. 2006); contract claim barred by four-year limit. |
| Does negligence accrue under 5-241 or 5-224? | Accrual occurs when damage occurred (2010) or later. | Accrual may occur six years after completion or upon damage; statute limitation applied. | Negligence accrues under 5-241, not barred; however economic loss rule applies to bar recovery for the well damage. |
| Is the negligence claim barred by the economic loss rule? | Damages include property and economic losses; factual disputes exist. | Damage to the well is purely economic loss relative to the transaction. | Negligence barred by economic loss rule because the well was the subject of the contract; exceptions not shown. |
Key Cases Cited
- West v. El Paso Products Co., 122 Idaho 133 (1992) (assesses improvement definition for accrual of contract-related actions)
- Nampa & Meridian Irr. Dist. v. Mussell, 139 Idaho 28 (2003) (applies accrual/limitations framework; clarifies four-year vs longer periods)
- Conway v. Sonntag, 141 Idaho 144 (2005) (negligence accrual requires showing damage from negligent act)
- Jones v. Runft, Leroy, Coffin & Matthews, Chartered, 125 Idaho 607 (1994) (sets four-year limit for negligence actions not involving injury; applies 5-224)
- Duffin v. Idaho Crop Imp. Ass’n, 126 Idaho 1002 (1995) (economic loss rule; damages linked to transaction subject matter)
- Aardema v. U.S. Dairy Systems, Inc., 147 Idaho 785 (2009) (defines subject of the transaction for economic loss rule)