Economic-loss rule no defense to real estate claim
By Matthew D. Taylor

The economic-loss rule, which limits the types of damages a plaintiff may recover in tort, does not apply to a real estate buyer’s claim of fraud, the Washington Court of Appeals recently held.

David L. Martin and Ketia Wick won a defense verdict after a two-week jury trial in Arhu v. Yamamoto, a wrongful-death medical-malpractice action. Plaintiff alleged a failure to educate and provide proper post-operative treatment after a knee arthroscopy. The patient developed a deep-vein thrombosis that resulted in a fatal pulmonary embolism. … Ketia Wick has co-authored "Defending Damages and Causation: Allegations of Delayed Diagnosis of Cancer," an article published in the November 2004 issue of For the Defense, the national publication of the Defense Research Institute. The co-author is Dr. Michael Retsky, a member of the faculty at Harvard Medical School. The article addresses claims of delayed diagnosis of cancer and demonstrates that the older theory of doubling times for certain types of cancer is not accurate.

Tammy L. Williams and Christina L. Smith won a favorable verdict in the six-day jury trial of Forsman v. Bitterling. Plaintiff claimed neck and back problems, post-traumatic stress disorder, and a closed head injury with cognitive difficulties after defendant rear-ended her on Interstate 5. Tammy and Christina filed a $15,000 offer of judgment prior to trial, which plaintiff did not accept. Plaintiff asked the jury for a verdict of $250,000. Tammy requested a defense verdict or, in the alternative, an award of $20,000 with comparative fault of 75 percent on the plaintiff. The jury returned a verdict of $25,000 for the plaintiff but found plaintiff 60 percent at fault. The net verdict for plaintiff was $10,000 — less than the amount of the Offer of Judgment, and as a result, plaintiff must pay defendant's statutory costs and attorney fees. … Tammy Williams also obtained dismissal for want of prosecution in Anderson v. Guckenheimer Enterprises, a premises-liability action.

The Alejandres sued Bull for fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation. Evidence at trial showed that Bull had experienced ongoing septic problems during her ownership of the house. At one point she did her laundry outdoors to lessen the load on her septic system. She hired various septic services over the years to restore the system to good working order, but she rejected their advice to hook up to the city sewer or to overhaul the septic system, because those measures were too expensive. When Bull later listed the property for sale, she filled out a disclosure form that denied any defects in the septic system, because it was working when she filled out the form.