FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO., A FLORIDA CORP., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORP., A PENNSYLVANIA CORP. QUALIFIED TO DO BUSINESS IN FLORIDA, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Florida law does not permit a buyer to recover economic losses in tort when there is no claim for personal injury or property damage to property other than the allegedly defective goods.
Florida Power & Light sued Westinghouse for breach of warranty and negligence regarding nuclear plant equipment. The trial court granted summary judgm…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Certified Question cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
Florida Power & Light sued Westinghouse asserting a breach of warranty claim and a negligence claim, arising out of an undertaking by Westinghouse to design, manufacture and furnish nuclear generating plant equipment for FPL’s Turkey Point plant in Dade County, Florida. The court granted a partial summary judgment in favor of Westinghouse on the negligence claim and denied partial summary judgment on the breach of warranty claim.
The case is before us on an interlocutory appeal by FPL under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) from the summary judgment for Westinghouse on the negligence claim.
This court certified to the Supreme Court of Florida two issues:
(1) Whether Florida law permits a buyer under a contract for goods to recover economic losses in tort without a claim for personal injury or property damage to property other than the allegedly defective goods.
(2) If Florida law precludes recovery for economic loss in tort without a claim for personal injury or property damage to other property, whether this rule should be applied retroactively in this case.
Florida Power & Light Co. v. Westinghouse Electric Corp., 785 F. 2d 952 (11th Cir.1986).
The Supreme Court of Florida has answered the first question “no” and the second question “yes.” Florida Power & Light Co. v. Westinghouse Electric Corp., 510 So. 2d 899 (Fla.1987). This decision, appropriately made by the highest court of the state in this diversity case, controls our decision.
The partial summary judgment in favor of Westinghouse on the negligence claim is AFFIRMED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Serina v. Albertson's, Inc., 744 F. Supp. 1113 (M.D. Fla. 1990)…purely economic claims.” Id. at 900. Subsequently, the 11th Circuit affirmed the trial court’s granting of partial summary judgment in favor of defendant on the negligence claim in Florida Pwr. & Light Co. v. Westinghouse Electric Corp., 835 F.2d 817 (11th Cir.1988). The “economic loss rule” of disallowing tort actions for recovery of economic damages without accompanying physical injury or property damage was also followed in a case involving a contract for services. See AFM Corp. v. Souther…
-
Action Orthopedics, Inc. v. Techmedica, Inc., 759 F. Supp. 1566 (M.D. Fla. 1991)…urely economic claims.’ Id. at 900. Subsequently, the 11th Circuit affirmed the trial court’s granting of partial summary judgment in favor of defendant on the negligence claim in Florida Power & Light Co. v. Westinghouse Electric Corp., 835 F.2d 817 (11th Cir.1988). The ‘economic loss rule’ of disallowing tort actions for recovery of economic damages without accompanying physical injury or property damage was also followed in a case involving a contract for services. See AFM Corp. v. Souther…
Authorities Cited
- Fla. Power & Light Co. v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 510 So. 2d 899 (Fla. 1987)
- Fla. Power & Light Co. v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 785 F.2d 952 (11th Cir. 1986)