Opinion ID: 884321
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Breach of Professional Duty

Text: In Count III, Turner contends that he is entitled to execute upon Ameritrust's claim that Kerin breached its professional duty to exercise due care as a civil engineer. Applying the same reasoning it used in rejecting the impairment of security claim, the District Court dismissed the claim for lack of foreseeability under the principles enunciated in Jim's Excavating. As with Count II, the District Court has misconstrued the nature of Turner's claim in which he seeks to execute upon a chose in action rather than assert the claim in his own right. However, since Count III, like Count II, does not allege that Turner is a judgment creditor entitled to execute, the same reasoning we set forth with regard to the breach of contract claim pertains. We affirm the District Court's ruling that Count III fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal of Counts II and III and reverse the order dismissing Count I (Impairment of Security) and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. TURNAGE, C.J., and HUNT, NELSON, REGNIER, GRAY and TRIEWEILER, JJ., concur.