Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Hawaii opinions name it 2 courts 1996–2012 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Hawaii 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 |
|---|---|---|
State Ex Rel. Bronster v. United States Steel Corp.green2 sentences2012Appellants argue that the economic loss doctrine is inapplicable because their claims “are based on allegations that [the Designers] violated a legal duty, separate and apart from any contractual duty.” 8 Under the economic loss doctrine, “a manufacturer in a commercial relationship has no duty under either a negligence or strict products liability theory to prevent a product from injuring itself.” Bronster, 82 Hawai‘i at 39, 919 P.2d at 301 . 2012Because the economic loss doctrine functions to bar the recovery of such losses in “negligent design and/or manufacture” eases, Bronster, 82 Hawai'i at 40 , 919 P.2d at 302 , we conclude that Appellants’ claims are barred. | 3 | 4 |
Plourde Sand & Gravel Co. v. JGI Eastern, Inc.green2 sentences2007In Plourde Sand & Gravel Co. v. JGI Eastern, Inc., 154 N.H. 791 , 917 A.2d 1250 (2007), the New Hampshire Supreme Court (the court) observed that the application of the economic loss rule "becomes more complicated in claims between a plaintiff and a defendant who have no contractual relationship and hence no privity between them." Id. at 1254. 2007In Plourde Sand & Gravel Co. v. JGI Eastern, Inc., 154 N.H. 791 , 917 A.2d 1250 (2007), the New Hampshire Supreme Court (the court) observed that the application of the economic loss rule "becomes more complicated in claims between a plaintiff and a defendant who have no contractual relationship and hence no privity between them." Id. at 1254. | 1 | 2 |
City Express, Inc. v. Express Partnersgreen2 sentences2012DISCUSSION The economic loss doctrine “bars recovery in tort for purely economic loss.” City Express, Inc. v. Express Partners, 87 Hawai'i 466, 469 , 959 P.2d 836, 839 (1998). 2012DISCUSSION The economic loss doctrine “bars recovery in tort for purely economic loss.” City Express, Inc. v. Express Partners, 87 Hawai'i 466, 469 , 959 P.2d 836, 839 (1998). | 1 | 2 |
Kennedy v. Columbia Lumber & Manufacturing Co.green2 sentences2007We decline to address whether we would adopt the second and third exceptions to the economic loss rule announced by the Kennedy court inasmuch as the AOAO did not contend that Liu "deviated from industry standards[,]" id. at 738, or that Liu "constructed housing that [it] knows or should know will pose serious risks of physical harm[,]" id. 2007We decline to address whether we would adopt the second and third exceptions to the economic loss rule announced by the Kennedy court inasmuch as the AOAO did not contend that Liu "deviated from industry standards[,]" id. at 738, or that Liu "constructed housing that [it] knows or should know will pose serious risks of physical harm[,]" id. | 1 | 2 |
Association of Apartment Owners of Newtown Meadows Ex Rel. Board of Directors v. Venture 15, Inc.green2 sentences2012To prove this point, Newtown Meadows, although a construction case not involving design professionals, clearly stands for the proposition that the economic loss doctrine bars the recovery of purely economic losses, even in the absence of privity of contract, so long as “allowing such recovery would blur the distinction between contract and tort law.” 115 Hawai'i at 292 , 167 P.3d at 285 . 2012To prove this point, Newtown Meadows, although a construction case not involving design professionals, clearly stands for the proposition that the economic loss doctrine bars the recovery of purely economic losses, even in the absence of privity of contract, so long as “allowing such recovery would blur the distinction between contract and tort law.” 115 Hawai'i at 292 , 167 P.3d at 285 . | 1 | 2 |
Francis v. Lee Enterprises, Inc.green2 sentences2012As stated earlier, privity of contract is not the criterion upon which the economic loss doctrine depends; instead, it is whether “allowing such recovery would blur the distinction between contract and tort law.” Newtown Meadows, 115 Hawai'i at 292 , 167 P.3d at 285 ; see also Francis v. Lee Enter., Inc., 89 Hawai'i 234, 244 , 971 P.2d 707, 717 (1999) (“Courts should avoid creating causes of action that unnecessarily blur the distinction between tort and contract”). 2012As stated earlier, privity of contract is not the criterion upon which the economic loss doctrine depends; instead, it is whether “allowing such recovery would blur the distinction between contract and tort law.” Newtown Meadows, 115 Hawai'i at 292 , 167 P.3d at 285 ; see also Francis v. Lee Enter., Inc., 89 Hawai'i 234, 244 , 971 P.2d 707, 717 (1999) (“Courts should avoid creating causes of action that unnecessarily blur the distinction between tort and contract”). | 1 | 1 |
Bishop Logging Co. v. John Deere Industrial Equipment Co.green2 sentences2012Co., 317 S.C. 520 , 455 S.E.2d 183, 188 (App. 1995) (describing Kennedy as a partial rejection of the economic loss rule "in the residential home building context”)). . 2012Co., 317 S.C. 520 , 455 S.E.2d 183, 188 (App. 1995) (describing Kennedy as a partial rejection of the economic loss rule "in the residential home building context”)). . | 1 | 1 |
Terlinde v. Neelygreen2 sentences2012That is, they ask us to recognize that a design professional owes a duty in tort to a commercial project owner to perform its work “commensurate with industry standards,” Kennedy, 384 S.E.2d at 737 (citing Terlinde v. Neely, 275 S.C. 395 , 271 S.E.2d 768, 770 (1980)), the breach of which allows the owner to recover purely economic damages. 9 Appellants warn that a contrary holding would insulate a design professional from liability. 2012That is, they ask us to recognize that a design professional owes a duty in tort to a commercial project owner to perform its work “commensurate with industry standards,” Kennedy, 384 S.E.2d at 737 (citing Terlinde v. Neely, 275 S.C. 395 , 271 S.E.2d 768, 770 (1980)), the breach of which allows the owner to recover purely economic damages. 9 Appellants warn that a contrary holding would insulate a design professional from liability. | 1 | 1 |
Anderson Electric, Inc. v. Ledbetter Erection Corp.green2 sentences2007Restatement (Second) of Torts § 552[.] Id. (some citations, brackets, and ellipsis omitted) (emphasis added); see also Carstens v. City of Phoenix, 206 Ariz. 123 , 75 P.3d 1081, 1085 (Ariz.Ct.App.2003) (concluding that application of the economic loss rule does not depend upon the plaintiff also having a viable contract claim against the defendant; rather, "irrespective of a plaintiff's contractual claims against a defendant, the rule bars recovery of economic damages in tort because such damages are not cognizable in tort absent actual injury."); Anderson Elec., Inc. v. Ledbetter Erection Cor 2007Restatement (Second) of Torts § 552[.] Id. (some citations, brackets, and ellipsis omitted) (emphasis added); see also Carstens v. City of Phoenix, 206 Ariz. 123 , 75 P.3d 1081, 1085 (Ariz.Ct.App.2003) (concluding that application of the economic loss rule does not depend upon the plaintiff also having a viable contract claim against the defendant; rather, "irrespective of a plaintiff's contractual claims against a defendant, the rule bars recovery of economic damages in tort because such damages are not cognizable in tort absent actual injury."); Anderson Elec., Inc. v. Ledbetter Erection Cor | 1 | 1 |
Wong v. City and County of Honolulugreen2 sentences2007The law of the case doctrine "refers to the usual practice of courts to refuse to disturb all prior rulings in a particular case, including rulings made by the judge [her]self." Wong v. City & County of Honolulu, 66 Haw. 389, 396 , 665 P.2d 157, 162 (1983) (citations omitted). 2007The law of the case doctrine "refers to the usual practice of courts to refuse to disturb all prior rulings in a particular case, including rulings made by the judge [her]self." Wong v. City & County of Honolulu, 66 Haw. 389, 396 , 665 P.2d 157, 162 (1983) (citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Carstens v. City of Phoenixgreen2 sentences2007Restatement (Second) of Torts § 552[.] Id. (some citations, brackets, and ellipsis omitted) (emphasis added); see also Carstens v. City of Phoenix, 206 Ariz. 123 , 75 P.3d 1081, 1085 (Ariz.Ct.App.2003) (concluding that application of the economic loss rule does not depend upon the plaintiff also having a viable contract claim against the defendant; rather, "irrespective of a plaintiff's contractual claims against a defendant, the rule bars recovery of economic damages in tort because such damages are not cognizable in tort absent actual injury."); Anderson Elec., Inc. v. Ledbetter Erection Cor 2007Restatement (Second) of Torts § 552[.] Id. (some citations, brackets, and ellipsis omitted) (emphasis added); see also Carstens v. City of Phoenix, 206 Ariz. 123 , 75 P.3d 1081, 1085 (Ariz.Ct.App.2003) (concluding that application of the economic loss rule does not depend upon the plaintiff also having a viable contract claim against the defendant; rather, "irrespective of a plaintiff's contractual claims against a defendant, the rule bars recovery of economic damages in tort because such damages are not cognizable in tort absent actual injury."); Anderson Elec., Inc. v. Ledbetter Erection Cor | 1 | 1 |
Casa Clara Condo. Ass'n v. Charley Toppino and Sons, Inc.red2 sentences2007Casa Clara v. Charley Toppino and Sons, 620 So.2d 1244, 1247 (Fla.1993) (citations and footnotes omitted).[ 43 ] Accordingly, ... we conclude that the economic loss doctrine applies to construction defect cases. 993 P.2d at 1265-66 (some citations, internal quotation marks, ellipsis, emphases, and footnote omitted). 2007Casa Clara v. Charley Toppino and Sons, 620 So.2d 1244, 1247 (Fla.1993) (citations and footnotes omitted).[ [43] ] Accordingly, . . . we conclude that the economic loss doctrine applies to construction defect cases. 993 P.2d at 1265-66 (some citations, internal quotation marks, ellipsis, emphases, and footnote omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Berschauer/Phillips Construction Co. v. Seattle School District No. 1green2 sentences1998The background and purpose of the economic loss rule was ably set out by the Washington Supreme Court, en banc, in Berschauer/Phillips Construction Company v. Seattle School District, 124 Wash.2d 816 , 881 P.2d 986 (1994). 1998The background and purpose of the economic loss rule was ably set out by the Washington Supreme Court, en banc, in Berschauer/Phillips Construction Company v. Seattle School District, 124 Wash.2d 816 , 881 P.2d 986 (1994). | 1 | 1 |
Moorman Manufacturing Co. v. National Tank Co.green2 sentences1996Co. v. National Tank Co., 91 Ill.2d 69 , 61 Ill.Dec. 746 , 435 N.E.2d 443, 452 (1982) (recognizing that economic loss is recoverable for intentional and negligent misrepresentation, but not innocent misrepresentation). 1996Co. v. National Tank Co., 91 Ill.2d 69 , 61 Ill.Dec. 746 , 435 N.E.2d 443, 452 (1982) (recognizing that economic loss is recoverable for intentional and negligent misrepresentation, but not innocent misrepresentation). | 1 | 1 |
Advanced Drainage Systems, Inc. v. Lowmangreen2 sentences1996See also Advanced Drainage Systems, Inc. v. Low-man, 210 Ga.App. 731 , 437 S.E.2d 604, 607 (1993) (recognizing section 552 as an “exception” to the economic loss rule); Moorman Mfg. 1996See also Advanced Drainage Systems, Inc. v. Low-man, 210 Ga.App. 731 , 437 S.E.2d 604, 607 (1993) (recognizing section 552 as an “exception” to the economic loss rule); Moorman Mfg. | 1 | 1 |
McCarthy, Lebit, Crystal & Haiman Co. v. First Union Management, Inc.green2 sentences1996Fbr example, in McCarthy, Lebit, Crystal & Haiman Co., L.P.A. v. First Union Management, 87 Ohio App.3d 613 , 622 N.E.2d 1093 (1993), the Ohio Court of Appeals noted: [T]hose courts which apply the economic loss rule to bar recovery in tort claims for negligent misrepresentation fail to take into account the express wording of Section 552, which provides that “one who, ... in any other transaction in which he has a pecuniary interest, supplies false information for the guidance of others in their business transactions, is subject to liability for pecuniary loss caused to them by their justifia 1996Fbr example, in McCarthy, Lebit, Crystal & Haiman Co., L.P.A. v. First Union Management, 87 Ohio App.3d 613 , 622 N.E.2d 1093 (1993), the Ohio Court of Appeals noted: [T]hose courts which apply the economic loss rule to bar recovery in tort claims for negligent misrepresentation fail to take into account the express wording of Section 552, which provides that “one who, ... in any other transaction in which he has a pecuniary interest, supplies false information for the guidance of others in their business transactions, is subject to liability for pecuniary loss caused to them by their justifia | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Hawaii. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
East River Steamship Corp. v. Transamerica Delaval Inc.
green
2 sentences2012A. The progression of the economic loss doctrine in Hawai'i The economic loss doctrine was first acknowledged by the United States Supreme Court in East River Steamship Corp. v. Transamerica Delaval, Inc., 476 U.S. 858 , 106 S.Ct. 2295 , 90 L.Ed.2d 865 (1986). 2012A. The progression of the economic loss doctrine in Hawai'i The economic loss doctrine was first acknowledged by the United States Supreme Court in East River Steamship Corp. v. Transamerica Delaval, Inc., 476 U.S. 858 , 106 S.Ct. 2295 , 90 L.Ed.2d 865 (1986). | 2 | 1996–2012 |
Seely v. White Motor Co.
green
2 sentences2012The Supreme Court effectively adopted the rationale of the California Supreme Court in Seely v. White Motor Co., 63 Cal.2d 9 , 45 Cal. Rptr. 17 , 403 P.2d 145 (1965), and held that no products liability claim lies in admiralty when a commercial purchaser alleges injury only to the product itself, resulting in purely economic loss. 2012The Supreme Court effectively adopted the rationale of the California Supreme Court in Seely v. White Motor Co., 63 Cal.2d 9 , 45 Cal. Rptr. 17 , 403 P.2d 145 (1965), and held that no products liability claim lies in admiralty when a commercial purchaser alleges injury only to the product itself, resulting in purely economic loss. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
American Towers Owners Ass'n v. CCI Mechanical, Inc.
green
1 sentence2012The application of the economic loss doctrine encourages parties to negotiate and state clearly the limits of their liability in a contract, and “preserves the right of design professionals to limit their exposure to liability through contract.” Id. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Terracon Consultants Western, Inc. v. Mandalay Resort Group
green
2 sentences2012In a certified question, the district court asked the Nevada Supreme Court: “Does the economic loss doctrine apply to preclude negligence-based claims against design professionals such as engineers and architects, who provide services in the commercial property development or improvement process, when the plaintiffs seek to recover purely economic losses?” Id. at 83 . 2012The court reasoned that the purpose of the economic loss doctrine is “to shield defendants from unlimited liability for all of the economic consequences of a negligent act, particularly in a commercial or professional setting....” Id. at 83 . | 1 | 2012–2012 |
2314 Lincoln Park West Condominium Ass'n v. Mann, Gin, Ebel & Frazier, Ltd.
green
2 sentences2007Homes, Inc., 142 Ariz. 439 , 690 P.2d 158 (Ct.App.1984) (applying the economic loss doctrine to a negligent construction against builder); 2314 Lincoln Park West Condo. v. Mann, 136 Ill.2d 302 , 144 Ill.Dec. 227 , 555 N.E.2d 346 (1990) (applying the economic loss doctrine to an architectural malpractice action); Atherton Condo. 2007Homes, Inc., 142 Ariz. 439 , 690 P.2d 158 (Ct.App.1984) (applying the economic loss doctrine to a negligent construction against builder); 2314 Lincoln Park West Condo. v. Mann, 136 Ill.2d 302 , 144 Ill.Dec. 227 , 555 N.E.2d 346 (1990) (applying the economic loss doctrine to an architectural malpractice action); Atherton Condo. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Calloway v. City of Reno
green
2 sentences2007In Calloway v. City of Reno, 116 Nev. 250 , 993 P.2d 1259 (2000), overruled on other grounds by Olson v. Richard, 120 Nev. 240 , 89 P.3d 31 (2004), the Nevada Supreme Court (the court) set forth the following reasons in support of its holding that the economic loss rule applies to construction defect cases: The crux of the [economic loss rule] is the premise that economic interests are protected, if at all, by contract principles, rather than tort principles. 2007In Calloway v. City of Reno, 116 Nev. 250 , 993 P.2d 1259 (2000), overruled on other grounds by Olson v. Richard, 120 Nev. 240 , 89 P.3d 31 (2004), the Nevada Supreme Court (the court) set forth the following reasons in support of its holding that the economic loss rule applies to construction defect cases: The crux of the [economic loss rule] is the premise that economic interests are protected, if at all, by contract principles, rather than tort principles. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Nastri v. Wood Bros. Homes, Inc.
green
2 sentences2007Homes, Inc., 142 Ariz. 439 , 690 P.2d 158 (Ct.App.1984) (applying the economic loss doctrine to a negligent construction against builder); 2314 Lincoln Park West Condo. v. Mann, 136 Ill.2d 302 , 144 Ill.Dec. 227 , 555 N.E.2d 346 (1990) (applying the economic loss doctrine to an architectural malpractice action); Atherton Condo. 2007Homes, Inc., 142 Ariz. 439 , 690 P.2d 158 (Ct.App.1984) (applying the economic loss doctrine to a negligent construction against builder); 2314 Lincoln Park West Condo. v. Mann, 136 Ill.2d 302 , 144 Ill.Dec. 227 , 555 N.E.2d 346 (1990) (applying the economic loss doctrine to an architectural malpractice action); Atherton Condo. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
ATHERTON CONDO APARTMENT-OWNERS ASS'N BD OF DIRECTORS v. Blume Dev. Co.
green
2 sentences2007Bd. v. Blume Dev., 115 Wash.2d 506 , 799 P.2d 250 (1990) (applying the economic loss doctrine to a negligent construction claim). 2007Bd. v. Blume Dev., 115 Wash.2d 506 , 799 P.2d 250 (1990) (applying the economic loss doctrine to a negligent construction claim). | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Olson v. Richard
green
2 sentences2007In Calloway v. City of Reno, 116 Nev. 250 , 993 P.2d 1259 (2000), overruled on other grounds by Olson v. Richard, 120 Nev. 240 , 89 P.3d 31 (2004), the Nevada Supreme Court (the court) set forth the following reasons in support of its holding that the economic loss rule applies to construction defect cases: The crux of the [economic loss rule] is the premise that economic interests are protected, if at all, by contract principles, rather than tort principles. 2007In Calloway v. City of Reno, 116 Nev. 250 , 993 P.2d 1259 (2000), overruled on other grounds by Olson v. Richard, 120 Nev. 240 , 89 P.3d 31 (2004), the Nevada Supreme Court (the court) set forth the following reasons in support of its holding that the economic loss rule applies to construction defect cases: The crux of the [economic loss rule] is the premise that economic interests are protected, if at all, by contract principles, rather than tort principles. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Chun v. Park
green
2 sentences1996In Chun v. Park, 51 Haw. 462 , 462 P.2d 905 (1969), we adopted the tort of negligent misrepresentation in a ease brought by purchasers of property and their lenders, involving the sellers’ title company’s negligent failure to report a recorded second mortgage on the property being purchased by the purchasers, and held that: It is true that the order for the certificate [of title] was placed by a real estate broker representing the sellers; however, the order also informed the defendant that the plaintiffs were the buyers and that the *41 Honolulu Savings and Loan Association was the lending in 1996In Chun v. Park, 51 Haw. 462 , 462 P.2d 905 (1969), we adopted the tort of negligent misrepresentation in a ease brought by purchasers of property and their lenders, involving the sellers’ title company’s negligent failure to report a recorded second mortgage on the property being purchased by the purchasers, and held that: It is true that the order for the certificate [of title] was placed by a real estate broker representing the sellers; however, the order also informed the defendant that the plaintiffs were the buyers and that the *41 Honolulu Savings and Loan Association was the lending in | 1 | 1996–1996 |
John Martin Co. v. Morse/Diesel, Inc.
green
1 sentence1996The Supreme Court of Tennessee, in John Martin Co. v. Morse/Diesel, Inc., 819 S.W.2d 428 (Tenn.1991), offered an especially lucid discussion of the distinction between a claim for economic loss based on a cause of action sounding in negligent misrepresentation and a claim for economic loss based on a cause of action sounding in products liability. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Waggoner v. Town & Country Mobile Homes, Inc.
green
1 sentence1996Representative of the reasoning utilized by courts adopting the economic loss rule are the comments of the Oklahoma Supreme Court in Waggoner v. Town & Country Mobile Homes, Inc., 808 P.2d 649 (Okla.1990). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
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.