Hogan v. Cone Mills Corp.

Judge EAGLES

dissenting.

To hold, as the majority does, that the August 1980 claim is barred by the statute of limitations is to ignore the intent of the General Assembly in its amendment of G.S. 97-53(13) to create a new cause of action for victims whose last injurious exposure was before 1963. The August 1980 claim was filed well within two years of the effective date of the legislation creating the remedy for victims whose last injurious exposure was pre-1963.

To hold that the claim here is barred by the doctrine of res judicata is to misapply the law. As quoted in the majority opinion, one…