Robins Dry Dock & Repair Co. v. Flint

holding no right to recover for economic loss resulting from defendant’s injury to a third party with whom plaintiff has contractual business relationship | holding no right to recover for economic loss resulting from defendant’s injury to a third party with whom plaintiff has contractual business relationship | holding that time charterer, who did not have a significant property interest in the ship at issue, could not maintain a negligence action against dry dock company for delaying in the performance of repairs to the ship and preventing the time charterer from operating the ship | prohibiting recov ery in the maritime field for purely economic loss unaccompanied by physical damage | adopting the majority rule that no cause of action exits for negligence that causes only economic losses | adopting the majority rule that no cause of action exits for negligence that causes only economic losses | explaining the general rule that a party cannot recover in tort for its economic losses unless that party suffers an accompanying physical injury or damage to its property | denying recovery to time charterer of vessel who sued for profits lost when defendant dry dock negligently damaged vessel’s propeller, causing extension of vessel’^ time in dry dock | prohibiting recovery in the maritime field for purely economic loss unaccompanied by physical damage | physical damage is a precondition to recovery of lost profits or impairment of earning capacity | vessel owners could not recover economic losses resulting from the delayed passage of their vessels, where such delays were allegedly caused by the defendant's negligence | tortfeasor not liable to another “merely because the injured person was under a contract with that other, unknown to the doer of the wrong" | public utility under contract with a city owes no duty to a person injured as a result of failure to provide or maintain streetlights | “... a tort to the person or property of one man does not make the tortfeasor liable to another merely because the injured person was under a contract with that other, unknown to the doer of the wrong.” | no recoveiy for economic loss absent physical injury to a proprietary interest | “a tort to the person or property of one man does not make the tortfeasor liable to another merely because the injured person was under a contract with that other, unknown to the doer of the wrong” | no recovery for economic loss absent physical injury to a proprietary interest | "as a general rule, at least, a tort to the person or property of one man does not make the tort feasor liable to another merely because the injured person was under a contract with that other, unknown to the doer of the wrong" | “[A] tort to the person or property of one man does not make the tort-feasor hable to another merely because the injured person was under a contract with that other unknown to the doer of the wrong.” (citation omitted) | contract for charter suspended while ship being serviced | although dry dock’s negligent damaging of ship’s propeller prevented plaintiff, who had chartered the ship, from using the ship for two weeks, plaintiff, who had suffered no physical injury to itself or to its property, had no cause of action for the purely financial injury it sustained | “as a general rule, at least, a tort to the person or property of one man does not make the tort feasor liable to another merely because the injured person was under a contract with that other, unknown to the doer of the wrong” | applying the economic-loss doctrine to a chain of contracts