Reasonable care is the applicable standard on suits based on a negligence claim. At trial both the plaintiff and the defendant would present expert testimony to establish the proper standard of care in the industry. The question for the court would be whether the defendant abstractor's performance of abstracting services met the standard of care that a reasonable abstractor would have exercised under the circumstances.

If the case were based on contract breach, the court would look for the intent of the parties to the contract. The intent may be found within the four corners of a written contract, or in the absence of that, the court my look for their intent in their past business dealings or conformity to industry standards (a contract law variation on the reasonable care standard of negligence cases).

The plaintiff could elect to sue on either a contract breach theory or negligence theory or both. The question then becomes what is covered by the defendant abstractor's e&o insurance. Most e&o policies are designed to cover negligence claims. Whether the policy also covers claims for contract breach depends on the language contained in the policy.

Here in Connecticut we also have another alternative to contract breach and negligence upon which to recover. We have an unfair trade practices statute. The statute allows for recovery of compensatory damages, punitive damages and attorney's fees for unfair busniess practices in the sale or lease of goods and services.  It is easier to recover under this statute than under common law tort theories of recovery.