3:25-cv-00842
D. Or.Aug 29, 2025Background
- Plaintiff Summit RWP, Inc., a construction contractor, applied a waterproof sealant manufactured by Tremco CPG, Inc. to an apartment complex's decks.
- Tremco sent a representative to personally instruct Summit’s employees on sealant application, but allegedly omitted a crucial application step.
- The sealant began cracking 25 months after application, leading Summit to strip and reapply the sealant at its own cost.
- Summit initially sued for breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose, and negligent training/instruction.
- Summit voluntarily dismissed the warranty claims; the only remaining dispute is the negligence claim.
- Tremco moved to dismiss the negligence claim under the economic loss doctrine.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the economic loss doctrine bar a contractor’s negligence claim for repair costs to client property? | Losses arise from property damage, not just economic loss. | Losses are purely economic; amounts to breach of contract. | No; negligence claim involves property damage, so claim not barred. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hale v. Groce, 304 Or. 281 (Or. 1987) (defines general negligence and exception for economic loss doctrine)
- Onita Pac. Corp. v. Trs. of Bronson, 315 Or. 149 (Or. 1992) (economic loss doctrine requires special duty for purely economic losses)
- Harris v. Suniga, 344 Or. 301 (Or. 2008) (limits liability for economic loss via economic loss doctrine)
- JH Kelly, LLC v. Quality Plus Servs., Inc., 305 Or. App. 565 (Or. Ct. App. 2020) (contractor can recover property repair costs if property damaged while in contractor's control)