Legal Opinion
Carstens v. City of Phoenix
Court of Appeals of Arizona
Decided September 9, 2003No. 1 CA-CV 02-0084PublishedCited by 28 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WEISBERG, Judge.
¶ 1 William and Deborah Carstens and Deborado, LLC, (“the Carstens”) sued the City of Phoenix (“City”) and three of its building inspectors alleging that the inspectors were grossly negligent because they failed to discover serious construction defects in the house that the Carstens later purchased. The trial court dismissed the tort claims under the economic loss rule because the Carstens had suffered no personal injuries or damage to property other than the alleged construction defects. For the following reasons, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.
BACKGROUND
¶2 In…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Casa Clara Condo. Ass'n v. Charley Toppino and Sons, Inc.Supreme Court of Florida · 1993
- Anderson Electric, Inc. v. Ledbetter Erection Corp.Illinois Supreme Court · 1986
- Calloway v. City of RenoNevada Supreme Court · 2000
- Moransais v. HeathmanSupreme Court of Florida · 1999
- Donnelly Const. Co. v. Oberg/Hunt/GillelandArizona Supreme Court · 1984
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Association of Apartment Owners of Newtown Meadows Ex Rel. Board of Directors v. Venture 15, Inc.Hawaii Supreme Court · 2007
- Gunkel v. Renovations, Inc.Indiana Supreme Court · 2005
- Flagstaff Affordable Housing Ltd. Partnership v. Design Alliance, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 2010
- Evans Withycombe, Inc. v. Western Innovations, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2006
- Wojtunik v. KealyDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2005
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.