7 Tennessee opinions name it 2 courts 1997–2025 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Tennessee courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Kenosha Hospital & Medical Center v. Garciagreen1 sentence2022Inc., 276 Wis.2d 361 , 688 N.W.2d 462, 467 (2004)) (“Application of the economic loss doctrine to cases involving defective products is not surprising, the court reasoned, because the [UCC] sets forth the full series of rights and remedies available to an aggrieved purchaser who suffers only economic losses.”).17 17 Although services contracts are specifically exempted from the economic loss doctrine under Wisconsin law, it is not clear that all non-products liability contracts are exempted from the ambit of the rule. | 1 | 1 |
24 Ucc rep.serv.2d 843, prod.liab.rep. (Cch) P 13,914 Bailey Farms, Inc., a Michigan Corporation, Cross-Appellee v. Nor-Am Chemical Companygreen1 sentence2019Co., 27 F.3d 188, 191 (6th Cir. 1994) (applying Michigan law to hold that the tort of negligent misrepresentation would be barred by the economic loss doctrine in the products liability context); Aprigliano v. Am. | 1 | 1 |
Morris Aviation, LLC v. Diamond Aircraft Industries, Inc.green1 sentence2019See id. (“The economic loss - 20 - (holding that by the Arizona Supreme Court’s adoption of a broad economic loss rule in the products liability context, it signaled its intention not to except negligent misrepresentations from the ambit of the rule);8 Bailey Farms, Inc. v. NOR-AM Chem. | 1 | 1 |
Edward Thomas Kendrick, III v. State of Tennesseegreen1 sentence2016See Kendrick v. State, 454 S.W.3d 450, 479 (Tenn. 2015) (stating that a trial court‟s decision of whether a statement is hearsay and whether the statement can be admitted into evidence pursuant to a hearsay exception is subject to de novo review). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Freeman v. Dayton Scale Co.
green
2 sentences2000As stated in Freema n v. Dayton Scale Co., 159 Tenn. 413 , 19 S.W.2d 255 (Tenn. 192 9), "where communication is made to a servant or business associate in the ordinary or natural course of business there is no act ionable lib el." See also, Woods, supra. Perry, 1994 WL 715740 , at * 2. 2000As stated in Freema n v. Dayton Scale Co., 159 Tenn. 413 , 19 S.W.2d 255 (Tenn. 192 9), "where communication is made to a servant or business associate in the ordinary or natural course of business there is no act ionable lib el." See also, Woods, supra. Perry, 1994 WL 715740 , at * 2. | 3 | 1997–2000 |
State of Tennessee v. Marlo Davis
green
1 sentence2025State v. Davis, 466 S.W.3d 49 (Tenn. 2015) (citing Tenn. R. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Digicorp, Inc. v. AMERITECH CORP.
green
2 sentences2022Specifically, in Digicorp, Inc. v. Ameritech Corp., 2003 WI 54 , 262 Wis. 2d 32 , 662 N.W.2d 652 , the Wisconsin Supreme Court applied the economic loss rule to a case involving a contract authorizing the plaintiff to sell and distribute the defendant’s products to consumers. 2022Specifically, in Digicorp, Inc. v. Ameritech Corp., 2003 WI 54 , 262 Wis. 2d 32 , 662 N.W.2d 652 , the Wisconsin Supreme Court applied the economic loss rule to a case involving a contract authorizing the plaintiff to sell and distribute the defendant’s products to consumers. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Insurance Co. of North America v. Cease Electric Inc.
green
1 sentence2022Inc., 276 Wis.2d 361 , 688 N.W.2d 462, 467 (2004)) (“Application of the economic loss doctrine to cases involving defective products is not surprising, the court reasoned, because the [UCC] sets forth the full series of rights and remedies available to an aggrieved purchaser who suffers only economic losses.”).17 17 Although services contracts are specifically exempted from the economic loss doctrine under Wisconsin law, it is not clear that all non-products liability contracts are exempted from the ambit of the rule. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Lincoln General Insurance Co. v. Detroit Diesel Corp.
green
1 sentence2019Lincoln General, 293 S.W.3d at 490–91. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Woods v. Helmi
green
1 sentence1997As stated in Freeman v. Dayton Scale Co., 159 Tenn. 413 , 19 S.W.2d 255 (Tenn. 1929), “where communication is made to a servant or business associate in the ordinary or natural course of business there is no actionable libel.” See also, Woods, supra. Perry, 1994 Tenn. App. LEXIS 763 , at *3. | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.