Fenner v. Florentine Forge, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Fenner v. Florentine Forge, Inc.

342 So. 2d 136, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 15239

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 15, 1977

DocketNo. Y-68

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 342 So. 2d 136 (Fenner v. Florentine Forge, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Fenner v. Florentine Forge, Inc., 342 So. 2d 136, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 15239 (Fla. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

MILLS, Judge.

Fenner appeals from an adverse final judgment which dismissed his amended complaint without leave to amend. The final judgment was entered on 11 February 1975 and dismissed the amended complaint on the ground that it was barred by the four year statute of limitations set forth in Section 672.725(1), Florida Statutes (1973). Fenner contends that the applicable statute of limitations is five years as set forth in Section 95.11(3), Florida Statutes (1973).

'■ The trial court erred in two respects. Firstly, Section 672.725(1) was repealed by Chapter 74-382, Section 26, Laws of Florida, effective 1 January 1975. Lastly, the action brought by Fenner on a written warranty not under seal is governed by the statute of limitations set forth in Section 95.11(3).

We reverse the judgment and remand for further proceedings.

McCORD, Acting C. J., and SMITH, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MILLS, Judge.

Fenner appeals from an adverse final judgment which dismissed his amended complaint without leave to amend. The final judgment was entered on 11 February 1975 and dismissed the amended complaint on the ground that it was barred by the four year statute of limitations set forth in Section 672.725(1), Florida Statutes (1973). Fenner contends that the applicable statute of limitations is five years as set forth in Section 95.11(3), Florida Statutes (1973).

'■ The trial court erred in two respects. Firstly, Section 672.725(1) was repealed by Chapter 74-382, Section 26, Laws of Florida, effective 1 January 1975. Lastly, the action brought by Fenner on a written warranty not under seal is governed by the statute of limitations set forth in Section 95.11(3).

We reverse the judgment and remand for further proceedings.

McCORD, Acting C. J., and SMITH, J., concur.

Dade County, a Political Subdivision of the State of Florida, Plaintiff v. Rohr Industries, Inc., Etc., the Flxible Company, Etc., Grumman Allied Industries, and Grumman Flxible Corporation, Defendants- Dade County, a Political Subdivision of the State of Florida, Plaintiff- Counterclaim v. Rohr Industries, Etc., Grumman Allied Industries, Inc., a Corporation, and Grumman Flxible Corp., a Foreign Corporation, Defendants-Counterclaim

826 F.2d 983 (Eleventh Circuit, 1987)

Dade County v. Rohr Industries, Inc.

826 F.2d 983 (Eleventh Circuit, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

342 So. 2d 136, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 15239, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fenner-v-florentine-forge-inc-fladistctapp-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack