THE OKLAHOMA BAR JOURNAL 36 | APRIL 2026 On the other hand, those seeking claims that can be tied to a contract should anticipate the economic loss doctrine being raised as a defense. It appears that Oklahoma courts, through Mills and Proe, have brought to focus that which may have been blurry by recognizing that the doctrine can serve as a basis to reaffirm the principle that it is improper to bring a negligence claim plea as an alternative to a breach of contract claim as an end-around in a dispute where contract terms govern and privity applies. Additionally, anticipating further application of the doctrine may serve as a point of future litigation efficiency. Being aware that the doctrine could apply in certain circumstances should cause parties to change their behavior. Understanding the boundary for viable claims could save litigants both time and expense. Addressing these issues early, when parties are negotiating and drafting contractual terms, could avoid costly litigation. Ultimately, Oklahoma courts have provided a sound and principled basis for the expansion of the doctrine into construction matters and commercial transactions, as well as other areas. In-house counsel and legal practitioners alike should closely monitor the evolution and application of the doctrine, while businesses and corporations should, likewise, prepare for a potential expansion of the economic loss doctrine and how they might protect themselves with it. ABOUT THE AUTHORS Wilson D. McGarry is a director at Crowe Dunlevy, representing clients in high-stakes civil and white-collar criminal matters, including complex commercial litigation and internal investigations. Prior to joining the firm, Mr. McGarry served as an assistant United States attorney for over a decade in the Western District of Oklahoma. He earned his J.D. from the OU College of Law. Evan G. Vincent is a shareholder and trial attorney at Crowe Dunlevy with significant litigation experience serving as lead counsel for a variety of complex and high-stakes civil disputes. He was inducted as a member of the American Board of Trial Advocates in 2023 and has achieved the advocate designation from the National Institute for Trial Advocacy. Mr. Vincent is a graduate of the OU College of Law and earned an LL.M. in trial advocacy from the Temple University Beasley School of Law. ENDNOTES 1. 2025 OK 23, 567 P.3d 385. 2. 2025 OK CIV APP 18, 574 P.3d 1. 3. Mills v. J-M Mfg. Co., 2025 OK 23, ¶15, 567 P.3d 385, 389. 4. Waggoner v. Town & Country Mobile Homes, Inc., 1990 OK 139, 808 P.2d 649. 5. Id. at ¶¶3-12. 6. Id. at ¶14. 7. Id. at ¶15. 8. Id. at ¶19. 9. Id. at ¶20. 10. Id. 11. Id. at ¶21. 12. Id. at ¶21 (internal quotations omitted). 13. Id. at ¶22. 14. East River Steamship Corp. v. Transamerica Delava, Inc., 476 U.S. 858 (1986). 15. Waggoner, 1990 OK 139, ¶22 (citing East River, 476 U.S. at 872). 16. Oklahoma Gas & Elec. Co. v. McGrawEdison Co., 1992 OK 108, 834 P.2d 980. 17. Id. at ¶¶1-6 (emphasis added). 18. 1992 OK 155, 845 P.2d 187. 19. Dutsch v. Sea Ray Boats, Inc., 1992 OK 155, 845 P.2d 187. 20. 2025 OK 23, 567 P.3d 385. 21. Mills v. J-M Mfg. Co., 2025 OK 23, ¶18, 567 P.3d 385. 22. Id. at ¶19. 23. Id. at ¶¶2-3. 24. Id. 25. Id. at ¶¶8-13. 26. Id. at ¶¶15 and 21. 27. Id. 28. Id. at ¶20. 29. Id. 30. Id. at fn. 5. In declining to extend the economic loss doctrine, it should not be overlooked that the Mills court cited other jurisdictions that have extended the doctrine beyond the context of products liability, yet the court explained that it had not adopted “such an expansive approach.” 31. 2025 OK CIV APP 18, 574 P.3d 1. 32. Proe v. Diamond Homes, 2025 OK CIV APP 18, ¶¶1-2, 574 P.3d 1. 33. Id. at ¶¶4-5. 34. 1988 OK 36, ¶18, 756 P.2d 1223. 35. Rodgers v. Tecumseh Bank, 1988 OK 36, ¶18, 756 P.2d 1223. 36. Id. at ¶1. 37. Id. at ¶18 (“The duty alleged in the borrowers’ alternative theory of recovery for tortious breach arises solely from contract. Without independent basis to support a tortious wrongdoing, there is nothing more than an alleged breach of that contract.”). Statements or opinions expressed in the Oklahoma Bar Journal are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Oklahoma Bar Association, its officers, Board of Governors, Board of Editors or staff. Ultimately, Oklahoma courts have provided a sound and principled basis for the expansion of the doctrine into construction matters and commercial transactions, as well as other areas.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTk3MQ==