In davis v. baugh industrial contractors, the traditional common law rule prevented a party who accepted a completed construction project from later seeing the contractor for flaws in construction that caused injury to others. in reviewing such a case, the Washington state high court held that:
a. state law prevented the cart from changing the rule
b. common law rules cannot change, so it couldn't amend the rule
c. common law rules cannot be changed w/o US Supreme Cart approval
d. the rule had good rationale behind it, so it would be maintained
e. the rule wasn't sensible in modern times and would be dropped