Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Harodite Industries, Inc. v. Warren Electric Corp.

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Decided July 6, 2011No. 2009-222-M.PPublished

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Flaherty

We write separately because we believe that this Court is passing on an opportunity to bring our jurisprudence in line with a substantial majority of jurisdictions in this country by announcing that statutes of limitations are procedural in nature and thus the law of the forum state controls.30 Such a pronouncement would eliminate the need for parties, trial courts, and this Court to conduct torturous interest-weighing tests on what are clearly procedural questions that inevitably lead to inconsistent and unpredictable results and undermine judicial efficiency.

I

The Interest-Weighing Approach…

2Cases cited37 opinions

  1. Keeton v. Hustler Magazine, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Sun Oil Co. v. WortmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  3. Woodward v. StewartSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1968
  4. Wetzell v. BussardSupreme Court of the United States · 1826
  5. Hossler Ex Rel. Dows v. BarrySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1979

32 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