Purty v. McDonnell Douglas Corp.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Purty v. McDonnell Douglas Corp.

508 So. 2d 501, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1432, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 12106

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 9, 1987

DocketNo. 86-1041

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 508 So. 2d 501 (Purty v. McDonnell Douglas 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

Purty v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., 508 So. 2d 501, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1432, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 12106 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed on authority of Shaw v. General Motors Corp., 503 So.2d 362 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). We certify the same questions:

(1) Whether the legislative amendment of section 95.031(2), Florida Statutes (1983), abolishing the statute of repose in product liability actions, should be construed to operate retrospectively as to a cause of action which accrued before the effective date of the amendment.

(2) 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 So.2d 874 (Fla.1980), applies so as to bar a cause of action that accrued after the Battilla decision but before the Pullum decision.

We need not reach the remaining issues.

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