Federal Distribution, Inc. (Distributor) runs a network of distribution centers across the United States. Distributor contracts with Awesome Architecture Firm (Architect) to design a major new distribution center in beautiful Durham, North Carolina.

As part of its design, Architect has to include an automated sprinkler system that will protect the building, its people, and its goods and also comply with the code requirements promulgated by the National Fire-Is-Really-Dangerous Board (Fire Board).

To arrange for the sprinkler design, Architect contracts with Icky Engineering, PLLC (Engineering) to prepare the design and oversee its implementation in accordance with all relevant specifications. Distributor is not a party to this contract between Architect and Engineer.

Engineering hopes to secure more business in the future with Architect, so it sends its most senior and experienced engineer, Elderly Engineer, to handle the job. Elderly Engineer is very familiar with the 2007 Fire Board requirements and carries with him a dog-eared and well-annotated hard-copy version of the 2007 rules. He knows that the Fire Board promulgated new rules in 2013, but he prefers his old copy with his helpful markings and is pretty sure there are no new standards that would change his design.

Three months after Distributor opens the new distribution center, a fire breaks out. The fire damages the building, its inventory (half of which was damaged because Distributor did not move it to a dry location in the week following the fire), and 2 workers on the night shift who were working when the fire broke out and were late to respond to the fire alarms because the room where Distributor had them working was nearly soundproof. Furthermore, the fire caused the distribution center to shut down for 4 weeks for investigation and repair, causing lost profits. Also, when the fire broke out, a fire truck arriving from a nearby municipality struck a car that was not parked close enough to the curb, causing damage to the car and the fire truck.

The investigation showed that the sprinkler system was defective, did not turn on swiftly enough, and this delay accounted for a significant amount of the damage andby allowing the fire to growcreated the need for additional fire truck support from the nearby municipality.

What fact, if found to be true by the trier of fact (judge or jury) would be most likely to allow an injured party to demonstrate duty and a breach of that duty?

• A. Engineering wanted additional business from Distributor.
• B. The sprinkler system did not meet the standards established by 2013 rules.
• C. Elderly Engineer's installation process constituted gross negligence.