Cassidy v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.
| Decision Date | 23 September 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. BK-198,BK-198 |
| Citation | 495 So.2d 801,11 Fla. L. Weekly 2023 |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
| Parties | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2023 Effie Dell CASSIDY, as guardian of the person of Kenneth Cassidy, Florida National Bank, as guardian of the property of Kenneth Cassidy, and Sharon Cassidy, as wife of Kenneth Cassidy, Appellants, v. The FIRESTONE TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, a corporation, Ford Motor Company, a Corporation, and the Budd Company, Appellees. |
Thomas T. Remington, of Smith, Grimsley, Remington & Kessler, Ft. Walton Beach, for appellants.
G. Jack Hardy and G. William Bissett, of Preddy, Kutner, Hardy, Rubinoff, Brown & Thompson, Miami, for appellee Firestone.
Gerald A. McGill, of Southworth & McGill, Pensacola, for appellee Ford Motor Co.
Thomas P. Schult, of Lathrop, Koontz & Norquist, Kansas City, Mo., and J. Dixon Bridgers, III, Carol R. Tierney, of Carlton, Fields, Ward, Emmanuel, Smith & Cutler, Pensacola, for appellee The Budd Co.
Cathy Jackson Burris, Ft. Lauderdale, for amicus curiae Academy of Florida Trial Lawyers.
Edward T. O'Donnell, of Mershon, Sawyer, Johnston, Dunwody & Cole, Miami, for amicus curiae The Product Liability Advisory Council, Inc. Sharon Lee Stedman, of Rumberger, Kirk, Caldwell, Cabaniss & Burke, Orlando, for amicus curiae, Florida Defense Lawyers Ass'n.
Appellants seek review of a summary final judgment entered in a products liability action for a 1982 injury, asserting that the court erred by applying section 95.031(2), Florida Statutes. We affirm the order appealed.
Section 95.031(2), Florida Statutes (1982), 1 provided that:
Actions for products liability ... must be begun ... within 12 years after the date of delivery of the completed product to its original purchaser....
Appellants' action involves an injury which occurred more than twelve years after the allegedly defective product was delivered to the original purchaser, and the action was thus not begun within the period prescribed by section 95.031(2). Both the injury and the commencement of the action occurred subsequent to the Florida Supreme Court's decision in Battilla v. Allis Chalmers Manufacturing Co., 392 So.2d 874 (Fla.1981), that in those circumstances "section 95.031(2) denies access to courts under article I, section 21, Florida Constitution." However, after appellants' action was filed the supreme court receded from Battilla and upheld the constitutionality of section 95.031(2) in Pullum v. Cincinnati Inc., 476 So.2d 657 (Fla.1985). As in the present case, in Pullum summary judgment was granted to bar a products liability action by application of section 95.031(2).
Appellants contend that Pullum should not be given effect in the present case, since appellants' action was filed after the decision in Battilla but prior to the decision in Pullum. However, appellants have shown no substantial inequity or unfairness which would result upon application of the Pullum ruling, nor does the decision in Pullum suggest that it should be limited to prospective application. 2 As indicated in Florida Forest & Parks Service v. Strickland, 18 So.2d 251 (Fla.1944), decisions overruling earlier precedent are generally given retroactive effect whereby judicial construction of a statute is deemed to relate back to the enactment of the statute. Appellants have shown no cause to depart from this general rule in the present case. 3 We therefore determine that Pullum should be given effect and appellants' action is barred by section 95.031(2), Florida Statutes (1982).
The order appealed is affirmed.
1 The statute has since been amended. See Chapter 86-272, Laws of Florida (1986).
2 Appellants' only suggestion of reliance on Battilla is the financial cost of initiating litigation. This assertion does...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Public Health Trust of Dade County v. Diaz
...constitute a detrimental change in legal position and did not render an erroneous order unreviewable. Cf. Cassidy v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 495 So.2d 801 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986) (cost of prosecuting litigation based on prior case law does not preclude application of change in decisional l......
-
Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. v. Phlieger
...her detriment, and as to her, Pullum should not be applied retroactively. The recent decisions in Pait and Cassidy v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 495 So.2d 801 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986), in which Pullum was retrospectively applied may be distinguished because in both of those cases the accidents......
-
Koppel v. Ochoa
...with Goldy . See Nat'l Ins. Underwriters v. Cessna Aircraft Corp. , 522 So.2d 53 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988) ; Cassidy v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. , 495 So.2d 801, 802 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). Likewise, the Second District's decision did not qualify as an "overruling decision" as described in Strick......
-
Smith v. Sturm, Ruger, Smith & Co., Inc.
...& Tool Works, 502 So.2d 943 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Pait v. Ford Motor Co., 500 So.2d 743 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); Cassidy v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 495 So.2d 801 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); and American Liberty Insurance Co. v. West and Conyers, 491 So.2d 573 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). Shaw, Small and Pai......