Ocala Corp operated a factory that caused corrosive particles to drift in the air and land on a building that was owned by Broderick Inc.Those particles damaged the roof of the building.The damage could have been repaired immediately at a cost of $250 000, but Broderick did not have the money necessary to do so.It therefore sued Ocala in negligence.By the time the trial ended several years later, inflation had run rampant and the cost of repairing Broderick's roof has increased to $900 000.Because of the modern approach to the "thin wallet" rule, Ocala cannot possibly be held liable for more than $250 000.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The "thin skull" rule, which is likely what is being referred to here, dictates that a defendant must take their victim as they find them, which in cases of property damage could extend to the economic circumstances of the plaintiff, including their ability to repair damage immediately. If the court finds Ocala negligent, it could potentially hold them liable for the full $900,000, as the damages were a direct consequence of their initial negligence, exacerbated by inflation over time.

Ocala Corp Operated a Factory That Caused Corrosive Particles to Drift