Case Name: Danny H. CHANCE and Earlene Chance, et al. v. AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR COMPANY, INC., et al.
Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1993-09-14
Citations: 624 So. 2d 23
Docket Number: No. W93-757
Parties: Danny H. CHANCE and Earlene Chance, et al. v. AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR COMPANY, INC., et al.
Judges: Before DOMENGLAUX, C.J., and KNOLL and WOODARD, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 624
Pages: 23–23

Head Matter:
Danny H. CHANCE and Earlene Chance, et al. v. AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR COMPANY, INC., et al.
No. W93-757.
Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.
Sept. 14, 1993.
Lawrence J. Duplass, Bernard J. Williams, Metairie, for applicant.
Karl J. Koch, Baton Rouge, for respondents.
Before DOMENGLAUX, C.J., and KNOLL and WOODARD, JJ.

Opinion:
WRIT GRANTED AND MADE PEREMPTORY:
The trial court erred in denying relators' exception of prescription. We find no clear expression of legislative intent that La.C.C. art. 3492, as amended in 1992, is to be applied retroactively. Absent such an intention, Louisiana courts have consistently held that prescriptive statutes will not be applied retroactively to revive an already prescribed cause of action. Hall v. Hall, 516 So.2d 119 (La.1987); Lyman v. Town of Sunset, 567 So.2d 1171 (La.App. 3d Cir.1990). Thus, the trial court erred when it ruled that the 1992 amendment to Article 3492 could retroactively revive the plaintiffs' cause of action, which under prior law had prescribed as of October 26, 1988.