[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

That was my view of it based on my understanding of Massachusetts law growing out of the famous old Ultramares case, and common sense, but Adam seems to suggest California has expanded the scope of the duty of care to anyone forseeably relying, and by that standard I could see how a subsequent purchaser (even if their precise identity was unknown to PSA at the time) could fit within that group. I leave it to you and Adam to debate the finer points of California law.