Legal Opinion

Queen City Terminals, Inc. v. General American Transportation Corp.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided September 6, 1995No. 94-113PublishedCited by 47 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPfeifer, J.

I

In its second proposition of law, appellant, Trinity, argues that the economic damages sustained by BP and QCT are not recoverable because the economic damages did not arise out of any personal injury or tangible property damage. Appellees, BP and QCT, argue that the mere coexistence of physical injury or property damage and economic damage makes the economic damages recoverable in tort absent privity of contract.

As a result of the city of Cincinnati’s exercising its right to revoke QCT’s street permit, QCT alleged it sustained economic damages of $6.2 million in useless terminal…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Temple v. Wean United, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Menifee v. Ohio Welding Products, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Pang v. MinchOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  4. Chemtrol Adhesives, Inc. v. American Manufacturers Mutual InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  5. Cascone v. Herb Kay Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1983

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by47 opinions

  1. MISC Berhad v. Advanced Polymer Coatings, Inc.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 2015
  2. Westfield Insurance v. Huls America, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1998
  3. Perkins v. Wilkinson Sword, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Welch Sand & Gravel, Inc. v. O & K Trojan, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1995
  5. In Re Whirlpool Corp. Front-Loading Washer Products Liability LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2009

42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API