Court Opinion

ID: 9660059
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 22:02:31.445594+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:14:13.583753
License: Public Domain

STEPHENSON, Justice,
dissenting.
After reviewing the complaint and amendment, it is apparent to me that this litigation will not be resolved in this century-
Ordinarily I would agree that we should not consider an appellate review of this interlocutory order. However, I would make an exception in this case. This is a truly extraordinary situation. A determination of the limitation question in favor of the five-year statute would resolve a major portion of the case. This question is squarely presented and can be resolved on the record before us. I might add that probability of success in challenging an interlocutory order in a case of this magnitude should play a significant part in determining whether to permit an appellate court to review the order.
With all of the novel issues and the complexity of proof in a case such as this, we are sentencing the parties to years of litigation which may well be futile in the end.
Accordingly, I dissent.
GANT, J., joins in this dissent.