835 F.2d 817
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO., a Florida corp., Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORP., a Pennsylvania corp. qualified
to do business in Florida, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 84-5946.
United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
Jan. 15, 1988.
Alvin B. Davis, Nancy Swerdlow, Steel Hector & Davis, Miami, Fla., for plaintiff-appellant.
R. Benjamine Reid, Kimbrell, Hamann, Jennings, Womack, Carlson & Kniskern, P.A., Miami, Fla., for defendant-appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Joe Eaton, District Judge, Presiding.
Before FAY, Circuit Judge, PECK* and GODBOLD**, Senior Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Florida Power & Light sued Westinghouse asserting a breach of warranty claim and a negligence claim, arising out of an undertaking by Westinghouse to design, manufacture and furnish nuclear generating plant equipment for FPL's Turkey Point plant in Dade County, Florida. The court granted a partial summary judgment in favor of Westinghouse on the negligence claim and denied partial summary judgment on the breach of warranty claim.
The case is before us on an interlocutory appeal by FPL under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1292(b) from the summary judgment for Westinghouse on the negligence claim.
This court certified to the Supreme Court of Florida two issues:
(1) Whether Florida law permits a buyer under a contract for goods to recover economic losses in tort without a claim for personal injury or property damage to property other than the allegedly defective goods.
(2) If Florida law precludes recovery for economic loss in tort without a claim for personal injury or property damage to other property, whether this rule should be applied retroactively in this case.
Florida Power & Light Co. v. Westinghouse Electric Corp., 785 F.2d 952 (11th Cir.1986).
The Supreme Court of Florida has answered the first question "no" and the second question "yes." Florida Power & Light Co. v. Westinghouse Electric Corp., 510 So.2d 899 (Fla.1987). This decision, appropriately made by the highest court of the state in this diversity case, controls our decision.
The partial summary judgment in favor of Westinghouse on the negligence claim is AFFIRMED.