Section 26 No Privity Required

• Library: Consumer Law and Practice 2010

The broad scope of the MMPA is further evident because privity is not necessary to establish liability. For example, when an appraiser is hired by a lender to appraise property, that appraiser often has no direct or contractual contact with the consumer. The appraiser may raise lack of privity as an affirmative defense. But in Gibbons v. Nuckolls, Inc., 216 S.W.3d 667 (Mo. banc 2007), the Supreme Court of Missouri unanimously concluded that the MMPA's language does not require a direct contractual relationship between a plaintiff and a defendant. Id. at 669 ("The [MMPA's] plain language does not contemplate a direct contractual relationship between plaintiff and defendant, and Missouri courts have not imposed such a requirement through statutory construction.").

Additionally, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has addressed the matter of privity under the MMPA. In Grabinski v. Blue Springs Ford Sales, Inc., 136 F.3d 565 (8^th Cir...