Legal Opinion

Mine Safety Appliances Co. v. Stiles

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided May 20, 1988No. S-2076, S-2101PublishedCited by 44 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

COMPTON, Justice.

David M. Stiles survived a traumatic injury while wearing a safety helmet. He made no attempt to investigate any role the helmet may have played in the accident within the two-year statute of limitations. Stiles discovered an alleged defect in the helmet six years after the accident. This petition arises from the denial of cross motions for summary judgment, the issue being whether the discovery rule doctrine applies to toll the running of the statute of limitations. We hold that the statute of limitations was not tolled.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On April 26,…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Zeman v. Lufthansa German AirlinesAlaska Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Moore v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Hazen v. Municipality of AnchorageAlaska Supreme Court · 1986
  4. White v. Johns-Manville Corp.Washington Supreme Court · 1985
  5. Gudenau & Co., Inc. v. Sweeney Ins., Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1987

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

3Cited by44 opinions

  1. Luedtke v. Nabors Alaska Drilling, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1989
  2. John's Heating Service v. LambAlaska Supreme Court · 2002
  3. Richardson v. Municipality of AnchorageAlaska Supreme Court · 2015
  4. Pedersen v. ZielskiAlaska Supreme Court · 1991
  5. Lee Houston & Associates, Ltd. v. RacineAlaska Supreme Court · 1991

39 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