Legal Opinion · Dissent

American Optical Corporation v. Robert Lee Rankin, Jr.

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided May 18, 2017No. 2015-CA-01066-SCTPublished

1Dissent

KITCHENS, JUSTICE,'

DISSENTING:

¶51. I respectfully dissent. In holding that Rankin’s entire claim is time barred, the majority wields a club when a scalpel is appropriate. While I agree that this case must be reversed on statute of limitations' grounds, I would remand for a new trial. Although these two statements may seem, at first blush, to be mutually exclusive, in this instance they are not. The majority finds that Rankin’s 2007 COPD diagnosis, as a matter of law, started the running of the' statute of limitations on his silicosis claim. But that conclusion is not supported by the case law…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Donald v. Amoco Production Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1999
  2. PPG Architectural Finishes, Inc. v. LoweryMississippi Supreme Court · 2005
  3. Corban v. United Services Automobile Ass'nMississippi Supreme Court · 2009
  4. Weathers v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceMississippi Supreme Court · 2009
  5. Angle v. Koppers, Inc.Mississippi Supreme Court · 2010

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