## Facts

- Richard Aikens operated a motel and restaurant near an interstate exit where a nearby overpass provided the shortest route for many customers; alternate access routes existed.
- Robert Debow, driving a truck for Craig Paving, transported an over-height trackhoe that struck the overpass, substantially damaging it.
- The overpass was closed for nineteen days while repairs were made.
- Aikens claimed the closure reduced customer traffic and caused approximately $9,000 in lost business revenue.
- Aikens alleged negligence but suffered no bodily injury and no damage to his own property; the damaged property was a state-owned bridge.

## Issues

1. Whether a plaintiff may recover in negligence for purely economic loss caused by a defendant’s negligent damage to a third party’s property, when the plaintiff has no bodily injury or property damage.
2. Whether foreseeability of business losses from a public-works closure is sufficient, by itself, to create a tort duty to protect against those losses.
3. Whether an exception permits recovery for purely economic loss based on a “special relationship” between the plaintiff and the defendant.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia answered the certified question in the negative.
- The court held that, absent bodily injury, property damage, or a special relationship creating a duty, a negligence claim for purely economic loss is not maintainable.
- The court concluded Debow and Craig Paving owed Aikens no duty to protect his purely economic interests in uninterrupted customer access.
- The court reversed the circuit court’s affirmative answer to the certified question, effectively barring Aikens’s claimed lost-profit damages.

## Legal Principles

- Negligence liability requires a legally recognized duty owed by the defendant to the specific plaintiff; duty is a question of law for the court.
- Foreseeability alone does not establish a duty to avoid causing purely economic losses to remote parties affected by damage to public infrastructure or third-party property.
- Purely economic loss resulting from negligent injury to another’s person or property is generally not recoverable in negligence unless:
  - the plaintiff suffers accompanying bodily injury or damage to the plaintiff’s property, or
  - a special relationship between plaintiff and defendant creates a duty to protect against the particular economic loss.
- The limitation serves to prevent indeterminate and widespread liability arising from ripple-effect commercial losses following a single negligent event.

## Conclusion

The court rejected a negligence claim for lost business revenue caused by a bridge closure because the plaintiff alleged only economic harm, suffered no personal injury or property damage, and lacked any special relationship with the defendants sufficient to create a duty to guard against purely economic loss.


Aikens v. Debow, 208 W. Va. 486, 541 S.E.2d 576 (W. Va. 2000)