John Phillip Risley, Individually, J. Stephen Risley, Individually v. Nissan Motor Corporation in Usa, a California Corporation

Eleventh Circuit

John Phillip Risley, Individually, J. Stephen Risley, Individually v. Nissan Motor Corporation in Usa, a California Corporation

260 F.3d 1310, 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 17964, 2001 WL 896913

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

DecidedAugust 9, 2001

Docket99-15321

StatusPublished

This text of 260 F.3d 1310 (John Phillip Risley, Individually, J. Stephen Risley, Individually v. Nissan Motor Corporation in Usa, a California Corporation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

John Phillip Risley, Individually, J. Stephen Risley, Individually v. Nissan Motor Corporation in Usa, a California Corporation, 260 F.3d 1310, 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 17964, 2001 WL 896913 (11th Cir. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

Before BLACK and MARCUS, Circuit Judges, and HANCOCK * , District Judge.

BLACK, Circuit Judge:

We sua sponte grant rehearing. Our prior opinion in this case construed Fla. Stat. § 320.643. See Risley v. Nissan Motor Corp. USA, 254 F.3d 1296 (11th Cir.2001). On June 8, 2001, the Governor of Florida signed Fla. Laws ch. 2001-196, which amends, inter alia, Fla. Stat. § 320.643. These amendments pertain, in part, to the procedural steps for filing a complaint with the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles. See Fla. Laws ch. 2001-196, § 23. Regardless, the amendments do not alter our holding or reasoning in this case, because, as noted in our prior opinion, the events here are governed by the 1997 version of the Florida Statutes. See Risley, 254 F.3d at 1297 n. 1; see also Barry Cook Ford, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 616 So.2d 512, 517 n. 5 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). Therefore, our prior opinion is REINSTATED.

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

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

Before BLACK and MARCUS, Circuit Judges, and HANCOCK * , District Judge.

BLACK, Circuit Judge:

We sua sponte grant rehearing. Our prior opinion in this case construed Fla. Stat. § 320.643. See Risley v. Nissan Motor Corp. USA, 254 F.3d 1296 (11th Cir.2001). On June 8, 2001, the Governor of Florida signed Fla. Laws ch. 2001-196, which amends, inter alia, Fla. Stat. § 320.643. These amendments pertain, in part, to the procedural steps for filing a complaint with the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles. See Fla. Laws ch. 2001-196, § 23. Regardless, the amendments do not alter our holding or reasoning in this case, because, as noted in our prior opinion, the events here are governed by the 1997 version of the Florida Statutes. See Risley, 254 F.3d at 1297 n. 1; see also Barry Cook Ford, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 616 So.2d 512, 517 n. 5 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). Therefore, our prior opinion is REINSTATED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

260 F.3d 1310, 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 17964, 2001 WL 896913, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/john-phillip-risley-individually-j-stephen-risley-individually-v-ca11-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack