Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

952 So. 2d 1239

Docket No. 3D06-2201.

Flowserve Corp. v. Bonilla

FLOWSERVE CORP. (f/k/a Durametallic, Inc.), Petitioner, v. Thomas J. BONILLA, et al., Respondents.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2007-04-04

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently October 2008

1 state decisions

Relies on 949 So. 2d 279 - DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Hurst

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2007-04-04

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Hawkins & Parnell (Atlanta) and Evelyn M. Fletcher, Ruden, McClosky, Smith, Schuster & Russell and John H. Pelzer, Fort Lauderdale, for petitioner.

¶2James L. Ferraro and David A. Jagolinzer and Case A. Dam, Miami, for respondents.

¶3Ullman, Bursa, Hoffman & Regano and Daniel S. Green; Fowler, White, Boggs & Banker and Tracy Raffles Gunn, Tampa, for the Florida Defense Lawyers Association as amicus curiae.

¶4Shook, Hardy & Bacon and Frank Cruz-Alvarez for the Associated Industries of Florida as Amicus curiae.

¶5Before COPE, C.J., and WELLS and LAGOA, JJ.

¶6PER CURIAM.

¶7Flowserve Corporation petitions for a writ of certiorari to quash an order of the trial court holding the Asbestos and Silica Compensation Fairness Act, §§ 744.201-209, Fla. Stat. (2005), to be unconstitutional *1240 when applied retroactively to respondents' pending asbestosis claims. The respondents' lawsuit was already pending on the July 1, 2005, effective date of the Act.

¶8We grant the petition for certiorari and quash the order on the authority of DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Hurst,949 So.2d 279 (Fla. 3d DCA, 2007).

¶9Petition for certiorari granted.

/952/so2d/1239 · .json · Public domain