Title: Ford v. Talley Mach. Corp.

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO                               
     The full texts of the opinions of the Supreme Court of                      
Ohio are being transmitted electronically beginning May 27,                      
1992, pursuant to a pilot project implemented by Chief Justice                   
Thomas J. Moyer.                                                                 
     Please call any errors to the attention of the Reporter's                   
Office of the Supreme Court of Ohio.  Attention:  Walter S.                      
Kobalka, Reporter, or Deborah J. Barrett, Administrative                         
Assistant.  Tel.:  (614) 466-4961; in Ohio 1-800-826-9010.                       
Your comments on this pilot project are also welcome.                            
     NOTE:  Corrections may be made by the Supreme Court to the                  
full texts of the opinions after they have been released                         
electronically to the public.  The reader is therefore advised                   
to check the bound volumes of Ohio St.3d published by West                       
Publishing Company for the final versions of these opinions.                     
The advance sheets to Ohio St.3d will also contain the volume                    
and page numbers where the opinions will be found in the bound                   
volumes of the Ohio Official Reports.                                            
                                                                                 
Ford et al., Appellants, v. Talley Machinery Corporation et                      
al., Appellees.                                                                  
[Cite as Ford v. Talley Mach. Corp. (1994),     Ohio St.3d    .]                 
Statutes of limitations -- Recent United States Supreme Court                    
     decision may not be retroactively applied to bar claims in                  
     state courts which had accrued prior to the announcement                    
     of that decision -- Section 16, Article I, Ohio                             
     Constitution, applied.                                                      
     (No. 93-295 -- Submitted February 1, 1994 -- Decided March                  
23, 1994.)                                                                       
     Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, No.                   
60415.                                                                           
                                                                                 
     Nurenberg, Plevin, Heller & McCarthy Co., L.P.A., Thomas                    
Mester, Richard L. Demsey and Joel Levin, for appellants.                        
     Mansour, Gavin, Gerlack & Manos Co., L.P.A., Dale E.                        
Markworth, Robert E. Blackham and Eli Manos, for appellee                        
Talley Machinery Corporation.                                                    
                                                                                 
     The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed and the                    
cause is remanded to the trial court on authority of Hyde v.                     
Reynoldsville Casket Co. (1994), 68 Ohio St.3d    ,                              
N.E.2d    .                                                                      
     A.W. Sweeney, Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer,                   
JJ., concur.                                                                     
     Moyer, C.J., concurs separately.                                            
     Wright, J., dissents for the reasons stated in his                          
dissenting opinion in Hyde v. Reynoldsville Casket Co. (1994),                   
68 Ohio St.3d 240, 246-250,     N.E.2d    ,    .                                 
                                    No. 93-295                                   
                                    Moyer, C.J., concurring                      
                                    Separately                                   
                                    File No. 8050                                
                                    Doc. No. 1994Y                               
                                                                                 
                                                                                 
Ford v. Talley Mach. Corp.                                                       
     Moyer, C.J., concurring separately.    I concur separately                  
in the judgment entry in the above-styled case.  As stated in                    
Justice Wright's dissent in Hyde v. Reynoldsville Casket Co.                     
(1994), 68 Ohio St.3d 240, 246-250,     N.E.2d    ,    , I do                    
not agree with the law announced in the majority decision.                       
Nevertheless, it is the law on the issue in the above-styled                     
case.  As I believe all parties should receive equal                             
application of the law announced by this court, and only for                     
that reason, I concur in the judgment entry.