The statute also fixed a limitation period in which a plaintiff could sue the city, and the city argued the limitation period had expired. Finally, the city argued that the damages sought were considered to be "pure economic loss," which at law were generally not recoverable.
The law established a timeframe for when a plaintiff could sue the city, and the city claimed this deadline had been reached. Additionally, they argued that the damages requested were categorized as "pure economic loss" and therefore ineligible to be recovered under the law.