[DOWNLOAD] "Lavespere v. Niagara Machine & Tool Works Inc." by United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit # Book PDF Kindle ePub Free

📘 Read Now     📥 Download

eBook details

• Title: Lavespere v. Niagara Machine & Tool Works Inc.
• Author : United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
• Release Date : January 18, 1990
• Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
• Pages : * pages
• Size : 67 KB

Description

RUBIN, Circuit Judge The application for rehearing asserts that our original decision1 erroneously held the procedural provisions of the Louisiana Products Liability Act2 applicable to this case even though that law was adopted after the cause of action had accrued, relying on several Louisiana intermediate appellate court opinions stating categorically, albeit cryptically, that the law is not retroactive. The proposition that, in general, the Louisiana Products Liability Act is prospective is accurate, but its unqualified application to the burden-of-proof provision of the law is not. In our original opinion we held that, as Article 6 of the Louisiana Civil Code provides, the substantive parts of the LPLA apply only prospectively ""in the absence of contrary legislative expression."" Finding that the legislature ""went out of its way to remain mute""3 on retroactivity because a provision purporting to make the law apply prospectively only was deleted as part of a legislative compromise, we interpreted the temporal application of the law in accordance with the interpretive prescription of the Louisiana Civil Code: ""substantive laws apply prospectively only. Procedural laws apply both prospectively and retroactively, unless there is legislative expression to the contrary.""4 Our opinion that the Louisiana legislature was deliberate in failing to prescribe explicitly the chronological reach of various provisions of the statute is buttressed by the fact that an effort was made in the Second Extraordinary Session of the 1988 Louisiana Legislature to enact a rule that ""all provisions"" of the LPLA ""shall have prospective application only."" This was vetoed by the Governor as being beyond his call for the session, hence unconstitutional.5 Lavespere's argument that the legislature thus expressed a will with legally binding effect despite the failure of the effort to become law is sophistic. The failure of the legislative effort fortifies our conclusion that, as originally adopted and still in force, the LPLA contains no provision determinative of the nonretroactivity of its procedural provisions. Accordingly, we held the burden-of-proof provision of the law procedural, hence applicable to pending cases.

PDF Books Download "Lavespere v. Niagara Machine & Tool Works Inc." Online ePub Kindle