Keyes v. Fulton Manufacturing Corp.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Keyes v. Fulton Manufacturing Corp.

506 So. 2d 1099, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1164, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 8069

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 5, 1987

DocketNo. 86-538

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 506 So. 2d 1099 (Keyes v. Fulton Manufacturing Corp.) 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

Keyes v. Fulton Manufacturing Corp., 506 So. 2d 1099, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1164, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 8069 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiffs appeal from a summary final judgment which determined that their product liability action against Fulton Manufacturing Corp. (Fulton) was barred by section 95.031(2), Florida Statutes (1983).¹ Suit was filed by plaintiffs in May, 1984, alleging that plaintiff Francis H. Keyes was injured oh February 15, 1984, by a defective winch manufactured by Fulton. It was established that Keyes had purchased the winch on August 3, 1971. Fulton moved for summary judgment on grounds the action was barred by section 95.031(2), as it was not commenced within 12 years after the date of delivery of the completed product to its original purchaser (Keyes). The trial court predicated its summary ruling on Pullum v. Cincinnati, Inc., 476 So.2d 657 (Fla.1985), appeal dismissed, — U.S. —, 106 S.Ct. 1626, 90 L.Ed.2d 174 (1986) (holding statute constitutional; overruling Battilla v. Allis Chalmers Mfg. Co., 392 So.2d 874 (Fla.1980)). We affirm. Shaw v. General Motors Corp., 503 So.2d 362 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), and authorities cited. As in Shaw, we certify the following questions to the Florida Supreme Court as questions of great public importance:

I. WHETHER THE LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENT OF SECTION 95.031(2), FLORIDA STATUTES (1983), ABOLISHING THE STATUTE OF REPOSE IN PRODUCT LIABILITY ACTIONS,[²]SHOULD BE CONSTRUED TO OPERATE RETROSPECTIVELY AS TO A CAUSE OF ACTION WHICH ACCRUED BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE AMENDMENT.

[1100]*1100II. IF NOT, WHETHER THE DECISION OF PULLUM V. CINCINNATI, INC., 476 SO .2D 657 (FLA.1985), APPEAL DISMISSED, — U.S. —, 106 S.CT. 1626, 90 L.ED.2D 174 (1986), WHICH OVERRULED BATTILLA V ALLIS CHALMERS MFG. CO., 392 S0.2D 874 (FLA.1980), APPLIES SO AS TO BAR A CAUSE OF ACTION THAT ACCRUED AFTER THE BATTILLA DECISION BUT BEFORE THE PUL-LUM DECISION.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiffs appeal from a summary final judgment which determined that their product liability action against Fulton Manufacturing Corp. (Fulton) was barred by section 95.031(2), Florida Statutes (1983).¹ Suit was filed by plaintiffs in May, 1984, alleging that plaintiff Francis H. Keyes was injured oh February 15, 1984, by a defective winch manufactured by Fulton. It was established that Keyes had purchased the winch on August 3, 1971. Fulton moved for summary judgment on grounds the action was barred by section 95.031(2), as it was not commenced within 12 years after the date of delivery of the completed product to its original purchaser (Keyes). The trial court predicated its summary ruling on Pullum v. Cincinnati, Inc., 476 So.2d 657 (Fla.1985), appeal dismissed, — U.S. —, 106 S.Ct. 1626, 90 L.Ed.2d 174 (1986) (holding statute constitutional; overruling Battilla v. Allis Chalmers Mfg. Co., 392 So.2d 874 (Fla.1980)). We affirm. Shaw v. General Motors Corp., 503 So.2d 362 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), and authorities cited. As in Shaw, we certify the following questions to the Florida Supreme Court as questions of great public importance:

I. WHETHER THE LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENT OF SECTION 95.031(2), FLORIDA STATUTES (1983), ABOLISHING THE STATUTE OF REPOSE IN PRODUCT LIABILITY ACTIONS,[²]SHOULD BE CONSTRUED TO OPERATE RETROSPECTIVELY AS TO A CAUSE OF ACTION WHICH ACCRUED BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE AMENDMENT.

[1100]*1100II. IF NOT, WHETHER THE DECISION OF PULLUM V. CINCINNATI, INC., 476 SO .2D 657 (FLA.1985), APPEAL DISMISSED, — U.S. —, 106 S.CT. 1626, 90 L.ED.2D 174 (1986), WHICH OVERRULED BATTILLA V ALLIS CHALMERS MFG. CO., 392 S0.2D 874 (FLA.1980), APPLIES SO AS TO BAR A CAUSE OF ACTION THAT ACCRUED AFTER THE BATTILLA DECISION BUT BEFORE THE PUL-LUM DECISION.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

506 So. 2d 1099, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1164, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 8069, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/keyes-v-fulton-manufacturing-corp-fladistctapp-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack