Filed: Oct. 13, 1995
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 67 F.3d 901 Prod.Liab.Rep. (CCH) P 14,386 AIRPORT RENT-A-CAR, INC. a Florida Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PREVOST CAR, INC., a New Jersey Corporation, Defendant-Appellee. No. 93-4015. United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. Oct. 13, 1995. Hugh T. Maloney, Gary S. Maisel, Patterson, Maloney & Gardiner, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, for appellant. Shirley Jean McEachern, Bard D. Rockenbach, Daniel M. Bachi, Sellars, Supran, Cole, Marion & Espy, P.A., W. Palm Beach, FL, for appellee. Appeal
Summary: 67 F.3d 901 Prod.Liab.Rep. (CCH) P 14,386 AIRPORT RENT-A-CAR, INC. a Florida Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PREVOST CAR, INC., a New Jersey Corporation, Defendant-Appellee. No. 93-4015. United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. Oct. 13, 1995. Hugh T. Maloney, Gary S. Maisel, Patterson, Maloney & Gardiner, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, for appellant. Shirley Jean McEachern, Bard D. Rockenbach, Daniel M. Bachi, Sellars, Supran, Cole, Marion & Espy, P.A., W. Palm Beach, FL, for appellee. Appeal ..
More
67 F.3d 901
Prod.Liab.Rep. (CCH) P 14,386
AIRPORT RENT-A-CAR, INC. a Florida Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
PREVOST CAR, INC., a New Jersey Corporation, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 93-4015.
United States Court of Appeals,
Eleventh Circuit.
Oct. 13, 1995.
Hugh T. Maloney, Gary S. Maisel, Patterson, Maloney & Gardiner, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, for appellant.
Shirley Jean McEachern, Bard D. Rockenbach, Daniel M. Bachi, Sellars, Supran, Cole, Marion & Espy, P.A., W. Palm Beach, FL, for appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.
Before KRAVITCH, ANDERSON and EDMONDSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
1
In this case we certified the following questions to the Supreme Court of Florida:
2
(1) WHETHER, UNDER FLORIDA LAW, THE ECONOMIC LOSS RULE APPLIES TO NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS FOR THE MANUFACTURE OF A DEFECTIVE PRODUCT WHERE THE ONLY DAMAGES CLAIMED ARE TO THE PRODUCT ITSELF AND WHERE THE PLAINTIFF CLAIMS TO HAVE NO ALTERNATIVE THEORY OF RECOVERY.
3
(2) WHETHER, UNDER FLORIDA LAW, A CAUSE OF ACTION OTHERWISE PRECLUDED BY THE ECONOMIC LOSS RULE MAY BE MAINTAINED IF THE DAMAGE TO THE PRODUCT IS CAUSED BY A SUDDEN CALAMITOUS EVENT.
4
(3) WHETHER, UNDER FLORIDA LAW, A CAUSE OF ACTION MAY EXIST OUTSIDE THE BAR OF THE ECONOMIC LOSS RULE WHERE THE PLAINTIFFS ALLEGE A DUTY TO WARN WHICH AROSE FROM FACTS WHICH CAME TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE COMPANY AFTER THE MANUFACTURING PROCESS AND AFTER THE CONTRACT.
5
Airport Rent-A-Car, Inc. v. Prevost Car, Inc., 18 F.3d 1555, 1559 (11th Cir.1994).
6
The Florida Supreme Court has answered the first question in the affirmative, and the second and third questions in the negative. Airport Rent-A-Car, Inc. v. Prevost Car, Inc., 660 So. 2d 628 (Fla.1995). Based upon these answers, we conclude that Airport Rent-A-Car's tort claims against Prevost, arising from the destruction of two passenger buses owned by Airport Rent-A-Car and manufactured by Prevost, are barred by Florida's Economic Loss Rule. We therefore affirm the district court's dismissal of Airport Rent-A-Car's claims.
