Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Garcia v. Superior Court

California Supreme Court

Decided May 3, 1990No. S004813Published

1Concurrence

LUCAS, C. J.,

Concurring.—The majority holds the facts alleged in the complaint may state a cause of action for “negligent misrepresentation,” as defined in the Restatement Second of Torts, section 311, but implicitly holds plaintiffs are precluded from stating a cause of action for “mere” or “regular” negligence. The dissent, quoting language from venerable commentators, asserts that for decades courts have upheld judgments predicated on regular negligence liability in cases of physical injury resulting from negligent misrepresentations, and have not required the plaintiff to meet the more…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Holt v. KolkerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1948
  2. Webb v. CerasoliNew York Court of Appeals · 1949

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API