Case Citator › Casa Clara Condo. Ass'n v. Charley Toppino and Sons, Inc.

Casa Clara Condo. Ass'n v. Charley Toppino and Sons, Inc.

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Limited by some courts
Court
Supreme Court of Florida
Citation
620 So. 2d 1244
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
28 of 28
Citing cases (total)
28
Treatment dates
1999
Limited by some courts
At least one reviewed court has limited this case’s holding to narrower facts or a narrower rule. No reviewed court has overruled it. Casa Clara Condo. Ass'n v. Charley Toppino and Sons, Inc. remains controlling for economic damage to a defective product, but its broader economic loss reasoning was limited.
More on how this was screened

All 28 flagged citations have been read, and one confirmed treatment is listed below. Moransais v. Heathman refused to apply that reasoning to professional malpractice. Tiara Condominium Ass'n v. Marsh & McLennan Companies later described the economic loss rule as confined to products liability, without separately treating Casa Clara; Florida courts continued to apply Casa Clara's rule that damage to a purchased home is not damage to other property.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

28 later cases cite Casa Clara Condo. Ass'n v. Charley Toppino and Sons, Inc.; 28 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Casa Clara Condo. Ass'n v. Charley Toppino and Sons, Inc.?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Limited

  • The Florida Supreme Court confined Casa Clara's broad economic loss reasoning and held that it does not bar a professional malpractice claim for purely economic harm.

    Moransais v. Heathman · Supreme Court of Florida · filed

    We also stated expansively in Casa Clara ... Today, we again emphasize that by recognizing that the economic loss rule may have some genuine, but limited, value in our damages law, we never intended to bar well-established common law causes of action, such as those for neglect in providing professional services.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Casa Clara Condo. Ass'n v. Charley Toppino and Sons, Inc. and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace