Add to ORKGIn Lincoln General Insurance Co. v. Detroit Diesel Corp., the Tennessee Supreme Court ruled that Tennessee law does not allow recovery in tort for a defective product that causes damage only to itself, regardless of the manner in which the damage occurs. The United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee brought this issue before the Tennessee Supreme Court through a certified question of law. The district court sought to establish the scope of the economic loss doctrine under Tennessee law, focusing specifically on cases where the damage to the defective product resulted from a sudden, calamitous event
The most significant case during the Survey period is Gulf Oil Corp.v. Forcum. The State of Tennesse...
In Robins Dry Dock and Repair Co. v. Flint, the Supreme Court laid down the general proposition that...
The economic loss doctrine has prevented countless plaintiffs from recovering their economic losses ...
This Article examines the issues surrounding the application of tort doctrine to problems of economi...
A defective product causes various types of damages. The type of damage suffered generally determine...
The economic loss doctrine is a judicially created rule that determines whether contract or tort law...
Most litigants, if given the chance, prefer to assert tort theories to recover their economic losses...
The Nebraska Supreme Court in Kohler v. Ford Motor Co. held that a manufacturer was strictly liable ...
The economic loss doctrine requires that courts distinguish economic loss from non-economic. Those d...
In Temple v. Wean United, Inc., the Ohio Supreme Court formally adopted section 402 (A) of the Resta...
The Tennessee courts have heretofore denied recovery in actions for breach of warranty in the absenc...
Tort scholars and jurists have recently focused on what is often called "the economic loss rule" in ...
This article discusses a California Supreme Court case which held that the economic-loss rule do...
In Melia v. Ford Motor Co., the Court. of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit was called upon for the thi...
Pure economic loss is not considered a recoverable harm in tort law. Professor Silverstein asks, Wh...
The most significant case during the Survey period is Gulf Oil Corp.v. Forcum. The State of Tennesse...
In Robins Dry Dock and Repair Co. v. Flint, the Supreme Court laid down the general proposition that...
The economic loss doctrine has prevented countless plaintiffs from recovering their economic losses ...
This Article examines the issues surrounding the application of tort doctrine to problems of economi...
A defective product causes various types of damages. The type of damage suffered generally determine...
The economic loss doctrine is a judicially created rule that determines whether contract or tort law...
Most litigants, if given the chance, prefer to assert tort theories to recover their economic losses...
The Nebraska Supreme Court in Kohler v. Ford Motor Co. held that a manufacturer was strictly liable ...
The economic loss doctrine requires that courts distinguish economic loss from non-economic. Those d...
In Temple v. Wean United, Inc., the Ohio Supreme Court formally adopted section 402 (A) of the Resta...
The Tennessee courts have heretofore denied recovery in actions for breach of warranty in the absenc...
Tort scholars and jurists have recently focused on what is often called "the economic loss rule" in ...
This article discusses a California Supreme Court case which held that the economic-loss rule do...
In Melia v. Ford Motor Co., the Court. of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit was called upon for the thi...
Pure economic loss is not considered a recoverable harm in tort law. Professor Silverstein asks, Wh...
The most significant case during the Survey period is Gulf Oil Corp.v. Forcum. The State of Tennesse...
In Robins Dry Dock and Repair Co. v. Flint, the Supreme Court laid down the general proposition that...
The economic loss doctrine has prevented countless plaintiffs from recovering their economic losses ...