Hatcher v. Allied Products Corp.
Decision Date | 15 August 1986 |
Docket Number | No. 85-8404,85-8404 |
Citation | 796 F.2d 1427 |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit |
Parties | Marian HATCHER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ALLIED PRODUCTS CORP., Defendant, Third-Party Plaintiff, John Deere Company, Deere & Company, Defendants-Appellees, Edwin E. Brown, d/b/a Brown's Well Drilling, Third-Party Defendant. |
Hillard P. Burt, Terry J. Marlow, Albany, Ga., for plaintiff-appellant.
Edmund A. Landau, Jr., Richard D. Hall, Albany, Ga., for defendants-appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia.
Before JOHNSON and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges, and DYER, Senior Circuit Judge.
The facts of this case are set out in the original panel decision certifying three questions of law to the Supreme Court of Georgia pursuant to Rule 37 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Georgia. Hatcher v. Allied Products Corp., 782 F.2d 926 (11th Cir.1986). These facts were restated by the Supreme Court of Georgia in its opinion answering our certified questions which is attached hereto as an appendix.
We certified the following three questions:
1. Where an injury occurred less than 10 years after the first sale of the product, and where suit is filed more than 10 years after the first sale of the product, does O.C.G.A. Sec. 51-1-11(b)(2) bar strict liability claims based on an alleged defect in the product?
2. Does O.C.G.A. Sec. 51-1-11 apply to negligence claims as well as strict liability claims?
3. Does O.C.G.A. Sec. 51-1-11 apply to distributors (John Deere in this case)?
The Georgia Supreme Court rendered its decision and answered question one in the affirmative and answered questions two In the appended decision, the Supreme Court of Georgia has held that Sec. 51-1-11 does not apply to negligence claims. Accordingly, the district court erred in holding that Hatcher's negligence claims against both Deere & Co. (the manufacturer) and John Deere Co. (the distributor) were barred by the ten-year statute of repose contained in Sec. 51-1-11(b)(2). The district court's grant of summary judgment with respect to these negligence claims is reversed, and the case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings with respect to these claims.
and three in the negative, 344 S.E.2d 418. Guided by these answers, we must decide whether the district court correctly concluded that Hatcher's negligence and strict liability claims against both Deere & Co., the manufacturer, and John Deere Co., the distributor, were barred by the 10-year statute of repose found in O.C.G.A. Sec. 51-1-11(b)(2).
The district court's grant of summary judgment with respect to Hatcher's strict liability claims is affirmed. Hatcher's strict liability claim against Deere & Co. (the manufacturer) was properly rejected by the district court in light of the appended decision of the Supreme Court of Georgia that Sec. 51-1-11(b)(2) bars a strict liability claim filed more than ten years after the first sale of the product, even though the alleged injury occurred less than ten years after the first sale of the product. Also, Hatcher's strict liability claim against John Deere Co. (the distributor) was properly rejected by the district court in light of the appended decision of the Supreme Court of Georgia that Georgia law imposes strict liability upon manufacturers only.
Hatcher also contends that application of O.C.G.A. Sec. 51-1-11 to her case unconstitutionally denies her procedural due process and equal protection. These claims are without merit and warrant no discussion.
For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part and REMANDED for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
APPENDIX
HATCHER
v.
ALLIED PRODUCTS CORPORATION et al.
Supreme Court of Georgia.
June 27, 1986.
This case comes to us upon three questions certified from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
Miriam Hatcher filed suit against John Deere Company and Deere & Company, maintaining the defendants were negligent and strictly liable for injuries she suffered on June 2, 1982 while using a product manufactured by defendant Deere & Company, and distributed by defendant John Deere Company. The District Court for the Middle District of Georgia granted the defendants' motions for summary judgment on all counts on the ground that Hatcher's claims are barred by OCGA Sec. 51-1-11(b)(2). Hatcher thereafter appealed to the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
The facts of the case, as stated by the Eleventh Circuit, are as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Love v. Whirlpool Corp.
...Circuit summarily held meritless a due process and equal protection challenge to OCGA § 51-1-11(b)(2) in Hatcher v. Allied Products Corp., 796 F.2d 1427 (11th Cir.1986). Inasmuch as Love is not a member of a suspect class requiring heightened scrutiny, we apply the "rational basis" test to ......
-
Gantes on Behalf of Estate of Gonzalez v. Kason Corp.
...is granted, plaintiff is barred from instituting a comparable negligence and strict liability action in Georgia. Hatcher v. Allied Products Corp., 796 F.2d 1427 (11th Cir.1986), LFE Corp. v. Edenfield, 187 Ga.App. 785, 371 S.E.2d 435 In Heavner v. Uniroyal, Inc., 63 N.J. 130, 305 A.2d 412 (......