United States: Federal Court Narrows Impact Of New Jersey Limitation On Economic Loss Rule And Integrated Product Doctrine For Component Part Manufacturers

Previously published in the Bloomberg BNA Product Safety & Liability Reporter

The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey has signaled that, on a case-by-case basis, component part manufacturers may be protected from tort claims by the combined effect of the economic loss rule and integrated product doctrine under New Jersey law, despite a New Jersey Supreme Court ruling that left product manufacturers vulnerable to increased exposure in litigation over pure economic loss to a product as a whole.

In Adams Extract & Spice, LLC v. Van De Vries Spice Corp., Civ. No. 11-720, 2011 U.S. Dist. Lexis 147851 (D.N.J. Dec. 23, 2011), the court defined the narrow scope of the New Jersey Supreme Court ruling and thereby reestablished the viability of the integrated product doctrine, as an extension of the economic loss rule, in barring tort-based recovery when an allegedly defective product is incorporated into another product that the incorporated product then allegedly damages.

Understanding the Legal Principles

While these legal arguments are not frequently employed by defense counsel, they are by no means a new legal creation. The seminal U.S. Supreme Court decision, East River S.S. Corp. v. Transamerica Delaval Inc., 476 U.S. 858 (1986), held that the economic loss rule barred a claim by the corporate plaintiff against the manufacturer of a ship's engine turbines, a part of which had allegedly failed causing damage only to the turbines themselves. The Court explained that the public policy behind the rule is that contract law, and the law of warranty in particular, is better suited than tort law to set and regulate the responsibilities of a manufacturer if a product fails to perform the function for which it was intended. In keeping with this principle, under the economic loss rule a manufacturer has ''no duty under either a negligence or strict productsliability theory to prevent a product from injuring itself,'' because if the product itself is defective, the purchaser is limited to a contract claim for breach of warranty. East River, 476 U.S. at 871.

The economic loss rule evolved following East River, and lower courts throughout the country began applying the rule to consumer plaintiffs as well. New Jersey's economic loss rule, codified in the New Jersey Product Liability Act, only permits a plaintiff to recover for ''harm'' which it defines as personal injury and ''physical damage to property, other than the product itself.'' N.J.S.A. 2A:58C-1(b)(2).

The New Jersey Supreme Court, in Alloway v. General Marine Industries, L.P., 695 A.2d 264 (1997), found that, pursuant to the economic loss rule and the integrated product doctrine, a luxury boat owner's insurance company was barred from any recovery against the manufacturer of an allegedly defective seam in the boat that caused the boat to sink. In determining the proper allocation of the risk of loss as between a manufacturer and a purchaser (or his insurance company), the New Jersey Supreme Court adopted and expanded upon the reasoning in East River by applying the rule to an individual consumer: ''a purchaser may be better situated to absorb the risk of economic loss caused by the purchase of a defective product. . . . Additionally, [when one has] prudently protected himself against the risk of loss by obtaining an insurance policy that distributed the risk to his insurer, . . . the question becomes whether [the insurance company] . . . which is in the business of insuring against the risk of harm caused by defective products, can better bear the risk of loss from damage . . . . [to which the Court answered: yes.]'' Alloway, 695 A.2d at 268 (internal quotations omitted). The court also explained that:

[I]njury to a product itself neither implicates the safety concerns of tort law, nor justifies '[t]he increased cost to the public that would result from holding the manufacturer liable in tort.' Allowing recovery for all foreseeable damages in claims seeking purely economic loss, could subject a manufacturer to liability for vast sums arising from the expectations of parties downstream in the chain of distribution.

Id. at 270 (quoting East River, 476 U.S. at 872).

Applying the principles of East River to consumers, the vast majority of courts in recent years have ruled in favor of economic loss/integrated product defense arguments when component parts of a product allegedly caused damage to the product as a whole. Part of the reasoning behind applying the economic loss rule to damage to an integrated product allegedly caused by a defective component is that the unreasonable risk of subjecting a manufacturer to such massive tort liability is even more unjust when the manufacturer only provides one component of a much larger final product that is ultimately sold to the consumer. As the U.S. Supreme Court explained, ''[s]ince all but the very simplest of machines have component parts, a contrary holding would require a finding of property damage in virtually every case where a product damages itself. Such a holding would eliminate the distinction between warranty and strict products liability.'' East River, 476 U.S. at 867 (internal quotations omitted).

Component Part Maker Defense Weakened by New Jersey Decision

These manufacturer protections were called into question, however, by the New Jersey Supreme Court's decision in Dean v. Barrett Homes, Inc., 8 A.3d 766 (2010). There, the manufacturer of an allegedly defective Exterior Insulation and Finishing System (''EIFS'') argued that the economic loss rule and integrated product doctrine shielded it from liability for toxic mold damage that the EIFS allegedly caused to plaintiffs' home because it was an integrated part of the home. The trial court awarded summary judgment to the EIFS manufacturer and the Appellate Division affirmed.

The New Jersey Supreme Court reversed, holding that the EIFS was not ''sufficiently integrated into the home to become a part of the structure for purposes of broadly applying the economic loss rule.'' 8 A.3d at 775- 76. The decision was a noted departure from New Jersey and federal case law, including the Appellate Division's ruling one year earlier in Marrone v. Greer & Pollman Construction Inc., 964 A.2d 330, 336 (N.J. Super. App. Div. 2009), that the integrated product doctrine shielded a manufacturer of EIFS from liability for damage to the plaintiff's home because ''the house is the 'product,' and it cannot be subdivided into component parts for purposes of supporting a [Product Liability Act] cause of action.''

Rejecting the application of the integrated product doctrine on the facts before it, in contrast to most of the existing case law, the Dean court stated that ''[p]articularly in the case of houses, a product that is merely attached to or included as part of the structure is not necessarily considered to be an integrated part thereof.'' 8 A.3d at 775. The court relied upon asbestos cases in which courts have taken the position that contamination constitutes harm to the building as other property, and two cases from the California Supreme Court holding that the integrated product doctrine did not bar recovery for structural damages to houses caused by defective windows and a faulty foundation. Id. at 775-76. The court concluded that plaintiffs could recover for damages to the house's structure or to its environs. Id. at 776. Justice Rivera-Soto wrote a vehement dissent, stating that the majority's conclusion that the integrated product doctrine did not apply to the facts before the court ''defies basic common sense'' and ''runs contrary to stark reality.'' 8 A.3d at 778-79.

Justice Rivera-Soto emphasized that EIFS siding is permanently attached to homes and can only be removed by extensive demolition work, much like roofing shingles, and he concluded that to find that ''any system so designed and installed is anything other than permanently integrated into the structure to which it is applied simply makes no sense.'' Id. at 779.

The court opened a wide door for plaintiffs to pursue tort-based economic claims against component part manufacturers without providing adequate guidance for determining when a product is integrated with its component part.

Federal Court Decision Narrows Impact of New Jersey Ruling

Now the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey has provided guidance on the scope of the Dean decision. In Adams, the court addressed the tort liability of the third-party defendant, a U.S. agent for an Indian manufacturer of red pepper spice, A.A. Sayia & Co. (''Sayia''), to the defendant/third-party plaintiff supplier Van de Vries Spice Corporation (''VDV''), in litigation over damages incurred by plaintiff Adams Extract & Spice, LLC (''Adams'') in recalling some of its spice blend products after it learned that a shipment of red pepper spice supplied by VDV tested positive for salmonella. 2011 U.S. Dist. Lexis 147851 at *1-*2. The court held that despite the Dean decision, ''the law as applied to this case weighs heavily in favor of considering the spice blends integrated products,'' and dismissed the negligence and product liability claims on Sayia's motion to dismiss. Id. at *10-*11, *15. The court concluded that the facts and reasoning of Dean, which address an allegedly defective product that was added to the basic structure of a house, were clearly distinguishable from the case of an allegedly defective component of a blended spice product, noting that the Dean opinion itself states that houses are particularly unique. Id. at *12. The court also reasoned that the rationale underpinning the economic loss rule, that damages occurring ''at the core of a commercial transaction'' are compensable only in contract, weighed in favor of applying the economic loss rule in this case, where contract remedies included incidental and consequential damages. Id. at *12-*13.

The Litigation Plan

Following the lead of Adams, other courts in New Jersey addressing dispositive motions based on the economic loss rule and integrated product doctrine should consider whether the case-specific facts are similar or distinguishable from Dean. Counsel for component part manufacturers must carefully time and frame the argument. Once defense counsel learns that no personal injury or other property damage occurred, then the question is the ideal time to raise the shield of the economic loss doctrine. The timing issue is best discussed with clients as soon as counsel determines that the economic loss rule and integrated product doctrine may apply. Raising the argument early on may be appealing to the client who is not eager to pay litigation costs for a year or more of fact discovery. Advising a plaintiff of the defense early in a case or even pre-litigation could result in an early and inexpensive victory for a component part manufacturer.

However, raising the defense too early in a case gives the plaintiff the opportunity to amend the pleadings to allege facts that may defeat the defense. Note that a simultaneous motion for a stay early in the case is infrequently granted. Many plaintiffs will oppose a stay and many judges may agree with the plaintiff and allow full discovery to play out—raising defense costs. Alternatively, skilled defense counsel may choose to make use of early fact discovery to lock in plaintiff's story, propound interrogatories on damages claimed and document requests for all insurance documents, product manuals, express warranties, etc., issue any document subpoenas to non-parties with information, and then take the deposition of the plaintiff (if needed). Once the plaintiff's story is locked-in—and ideally after the time for the plaintiff to amend the complaint has long passed—the component part manufacturer may safely move for summary judgment pursuant to the economic loss rule and integrated product doctrine.

Finally, the last reasonable time to raise the defense is at the close of discovery and no later than the deadline for dispositive motions. While plaintiff cannot object to the timing of a summary judgment motion at this stage, the component part manufacturer has now expended significant funds in defending a case (although notably far less than if the case was to proceed to trial). Of course, if the defense is rejected by the court at summary judgment, then trial is right around the corner and defense counsel better be prepared with additional defenses for trial, or be prepared to settle or try the case. One thing that cannot be overemphasized: the importance of defense counsel and the client engaging in an early discussion analyzing the economic loss rule and integrated product doctrine defense and the timing of a litigation plan, so as to fully explore the pros and cons of when to move to dismiss.

Anticipating the Future

After Dean and Adams, the central question remains whether or not a component part will be viewed as an integrated part of a product, and the answer to this question will make the difference between a case that is dismissed under the economic loss rule and one where the component part manufacturer may be liable for substantial damages.

Adams tells us that Dean's holding and reasoning may be significantly narrowed and may be limited to cases involving defective products added to the structure of a home, and thus the broad protections of the economic loss rule and integrated product doctrine remain a viable defense for a wide range of component part manufacturers in New Jersey.

www.schnader.com

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
In association with
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.

Disclaimer

Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.

Registration

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.

Cookies

A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.

Links

This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.

Mail-A-Friend

If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.

Security

This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.