Epic Hotel, LLC v. Culligan International Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Epic Hotel, LLC v. Culligan International Co.

159 So. 3d 1014, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 4216, 2015 WL 1319861

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 25, 2015

DocketNo. 3D14-2142

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 159 So. 3d 1014 (Epic Hotel, LLC v. Culligan International Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Epic Hotel, LLC v. Culligan International Co., 159 So. 3d 1014, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 4216, 2015 WL 1319861 (Fla. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Tiara Condo. Ass’n, Inc. v. Marsh & McLennan Co., Inc., 110 So.3d 399, 407 (Fla.2013) (“[T]he economic loss rule applies only in the products liability context.”); Casa Clara Condo. Ass’n, Inc. v. Charley Toppino & Sons, Inc., 620 So.2d 1244, 1247 (Fla.1993) (“The character of a loss determines the appropriate remedies, and, to determine the character of a loss, one must look to the product purchased by the plaintiff, not the product sold by the defendant.”) (emphasis added); see also, East River S.S. Corp. v. Transamerica Delaval, Inc., 476 U.S. 858, 872, 106 S.Ct. 2295, 90 L.Ed.2d 865 (1986) (“Damage to a product itself ... means simply that the product has not met the customer’s expectations, or, in other words, that the customer has received ‘insufficient product value.’ ”).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Tiara Condo. Ass’n, Inc. v. Marsh & McLennan Co., Inc., 110 So.3d 399, 407 (Fla.2013) (“[T]he economic loss rule applies only in the products liability context.”); Casa Clara Condo. Ass’n, Inc. v. Charley Toppino & Sons, Inc., 620 So.2d 1244, 1247 (Fla.1993) (“The character of a loss determines the appropriate remedies, and, to determine the character of a loss, one must look to the product purchased by the plaintiff, not the product sold by the defendant.”) (emphasis added); see also, East River S.S. Corp. v. Transamerica Delaval, Inc., 476 U.S. 858, 872, 106 S.Ct. 2295, 90 L.Ed.2d 865 (1986) (“Damage to a product itself ... means simply that the product has not met the customer’s expectations, or, in other words, that the customer has received ‘insufficient product value.’ ”).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

159 So. 3d 1014, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 4216, 2015 WL 1319861, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/epic-hotel-llc-v-culligan-international-co-fladistctapp-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack