Legal Opinion · Dissent

Larry Myers v. Crouse-Hinds: GE v. Mary R. Geyman: Owens-Illinois, Inc v. Mary R. Geyman

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided March 2, 2016No. 49S00-1502-MI-119: 49S00-1501-MI-35: 49S00-1501-MI-36Published

1DissentMassa, J.

I agree with much of Chief Justice Rush’s dissent, including, perhaps even, her observation that today’s decision is not a catastrophe. Time will tell. But I do believe it has the potential to more than chip away at the rule of law and inflict more serious damage on our Court and state, so I write separately about these concerns.

The ruling of the Court will be seen in some quarters as righting a historic injustice. Maybe so, but I must respectfully disagree. Twenty-seven years after the unconstitutionality of our statute of repose was first suggested in a dissenting opinion,1 it is now…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Dague v. Piper Aircraft Corp.Indiana Supreme Court · 1981
  2. Wehling v. Citizens National BankIndiana Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Marsillett v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1986
  4. McIntosh v. Melroe Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 2000
  5. Covalt v. Carey Canada, Inc.Indiana Supreme Court · 1989

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API