With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". delayed opening of the restaurant when the subcontractor misread the building plans and constructed the building foundation in the wrong location. See id. at 1302. The court cited the economic loss rule as the basis for its holding: As a general rule, no cause of action lies in tort when purely economic damage is caused by negligent breach of a contractual duty. This economic loss rule prevents recovery for negligence when the duty breached is a contractual duty and the harm incurred is the result of failure of the purpose of the contract. Id. at 1303. A number of courts of appeals cases have applied the economic loss rule in varying contexts since the decision in Jardel. See, e.g., Town of Alma, 985 P.2d at 57 (this appeal); Grynberg v. Agri Tech, Inc., 985 P.2d 59, 63 (Colo.App.1999) (<HOLDING>); Terrones v. Tapia, 967 P.2d 216, 220

A: holding that economic loss doctrine bars negligence claims as to engineering services related to roof repair and reconstruction
B: holding that the economic loss rule bars negligence claim for failure to receive a particular return on cattle investment program
C: holding that subject to certain exceptions the economic loss rule bars recovery in tort for economic damages arising out of matters governed by contract
D: holding economic loss doctrine bars negligence claim based on service contract
B.