Court Opinion

ID: 9854459
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 06:07:53.201243+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:23:05.396919
License: Public Domain

Justice Webb
dissenting.
I dissent from the majority. In determining the choice of law for the application of the statute of repose, the majority relies on *349previous statements of this Court that statutes of repose are substantive definitions of rights. Lamb v. Wedgewood South Corp., 308 N.C. 419, 302 S.E. 2d 868 (1983); Bolick v. American Barmag Corp., 306 N.C. 364, 293 S.E. 2d 415 (1982). It is not necessary to question the validity of these statements to see we should not have a different treatment for statutes of limitation and statutes of repose in choice of law determinations.
Whatever differences we may find in statutes of limitation and statutes of repose, the purpose of both of them is to bar claims which are not filed within certain times. The majority has not said why there should be a different treatment of them because we call one statute substantive and the other procedural. I do not see why we should. The law of the forum applies when a statute of limitations is pled. Sayer v. Henderson, 225 N.C. 642, 35 S.E. 2d 875 (1945). By using a different choice of law for a statute of repose, I believe we are giving different treatment to statutes which were adopted for the same purpose. I do not believe we should do so.
I agree with the opinion written by Judge Parker for the Court of Appeals. The majority says that the Court of Appeals in reaching its decision “relied on a ‘public policy’ exception.” The only time the Court of Appeals mentioned public policy was in quoting from an opinion of this Court, Tieffenbrun v. Flannery, 198 N.C. 397, 151 S.E. 857, 68 A.L.R. 210 (1930), which held that although the time limitation on the wrongful death action had been held to be a condition precedent to the action, the limitation also applied to an action brought in this state when the action was based on a death that occurred in Florida. Tieffenbrun comes close to governing this case.