Court Opinion

ID: 9777124
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 19:59:02.194196+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:32:48.909898
License: Public Domain

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
There is language in Mid Continent Aircraft Corporation’s motion for rehearing ascribing to the majority opinion a holding that the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A rule of strict liability gives a right of recovery for purely economic loss. The language operates on a misconstruction of the opinion, for we clearly pointed out that the law of sales, and not the rule of strict liability, applies to purely economic damages.
The holding of the majority is that the rule of strict liability imposes on one who sells a product in a defective condition, which renders the product unreasonably dangerous to the user or consumer or to his property and which causes physical harm to the product itself, liability for that physical harm, unless knowledgeable parties of equal bargaining strength otherwise define, as between themselves, their scope of responsibility for strict liability to which an “as is” contractual sale does not apply. Because Mid Continent confined the appellate issue to whether or not it had any liability, it excluded from our consideration either the measure or the amount of damages found by the trial court.
The motion for rehearing is overruled.
ROBINSON, J., dissents to the overruling of the motion for rehearing.