Flowserve Corp. v. Bonilla
This text of 952 So. 2d 1239 (Flowserve Corp. v. Bonilla) 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.
Opinion
FLOWSERVE CORP. (f/k/a Durametallic, Inc.), Petitioner,
v.
Thomas J. BONILLA, et al., Respondents.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Hawkins & Parnell (Atlanta) and Evelyn M. Fletcher, Ruden, McClosky, Smith, Schuster & Russell and John H. Pelzer, Fort Lauderdale, for petitioner.
James L. Ferraro and David A. Jagolinzer and Case A. Dam, Miami, for respondents.
Ullman, Bursa, Hoffman & Regano and Daniel S. Green; Fowler, White, Boggs & Banker and Tracy Raffles Gunn, Tampa, for the Florida Defense Lawyers Association as amicus curiae.
Shook, Hardy & Bacon and Frank Cruz-Alvarez for the Associated Industries of Florida as Amicus curiae.
Before COPE, C.J., and WELLS and LAGOA, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Flowserve Corporation petitions for a writ of certiorari to quash an order of the trial court holding the Asbestos and Silica Compensation Fairness Act, §§ 744.201-209, Fla. Stat. (2005), to be unconstitutional *1240 when applied retroactively to respondents' pending asbestosis claims. The respondents' lawsuit was already pending on the July 1, 2005, effective date of the Act.
We grant the petition for certiorari and quash the order on the authority of DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Hurst, 949 So.2d 279 (Fla. 3d DCA, 2007).
Petition for certiorari granted.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
952 So. 2d 1239, 2007 WL 981640, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flowserve-corp-v-bonilla-fladistctapp-2007.