Puchner v. Bache Halsey Stuart, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the appellant’s claim was barred because it was commenced after the time periods prescribed by section 95.11(4)(e)
• holding that the appellant's claim was barred because it was commenced after the time periods prescribed by section 95.11(4)(e)
• applying section 95.031(2) to extinguish claims based on fraud that occurred outside the twelve-year statute of repose
• “Because Pulchner filed suit in August of 1982, any fraud committed before August of 1971 is barred by the statute of repose.”
• twelve-year statute of repose for fraud

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).