J.I. Case Co. v. Henley
J.I. Case Co. v. Henley
517 So. 2d 692; 13 Fla. L. Weekly 27; 1988 Fla. LEXIS 21; 1988 WL 1520
(Southern Reporter, Second Series)
Cases that cite this one
3 later published cases cite this decision.
- Hall v. State (Fla. 1988)
- Navistar International Co. v. Sullivan (Fla. 1988)
- Sears, Roebuck & Company v. Pinero (Fla. 1988)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
We review Henley v. J.I. Case Co., 510 So.2d 342 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), to answer a certified question of great public importance. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. The certified question is as follows:
DOES THE STATUTE OF REPOSE BAR A WRONGFUL DEATH ACTION WHERE THE DEATH OCCURRED MORE THAN TWELVE YEARS AFTER THE ORIGINAL PURCHASE OF THE PRODUCT WHICH ALLEGEDLY CAUSED THE DEATH?
510 So.2d at 343. We recently answered the question in the affirmative in Pait v. Ford Motor Co., 515 So.2d 1278 (Fla. 1987). We quash the decision below on the authority of Pait.
It is so ordered.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.