Sears, Roebuck & Company v. Pinero
Supreme Court of Florida
1Per curiam
We review Pinero v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 515 So.2d 422 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4), Florida Constitution, to answer the following certified question of great public importance:
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?
515 So.2d at 422-23.
As respondent concedes, we already have answered that question in the affirmative in J.I. Case Co. v. Henley, 517 So.2d 692 (Fla.1988), and Pait v. Ford Motor Co., 515 So.2d 1278 (Fla.1987).…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Melendez v. Dreis and Krump Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1987
- Pait v. Ford Motor CompanySupreme Court of Florida · 1987
- J.I. Case Co. v. HenleySupreme Court of Florida · 1988
- Pinero v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1987