## Facts

- Cumberland Engineering manufactured and first sold a plastic-extrusion machine in November 1969.
- Service Color Corporation later obtained and used the machine in its business.
- On or about October 16, 1978, Charles Kennedy, an employee operating the machine, suffered serious hand injuries, including amputation of three fingers and fracture of a fourth.
- On October 6, 1981, Kennedy sued Cumberland alleging defective design/manufacture and failure to warn or instruct.
- Rhode Island’s general personal-injury limitations period was three years, making the filing timely measured from the 1978 injury.
- A 1978 amendment, G.L. 1956 § 9-1-13(b), required product-defect actions to be filed within ten years after the product was first purchased for use or consumption; measured from the 1969 purchase, the 1981 suit fell outside ten years.

## Issues

1. Whether G.L. 1956 § 9-1-13(b), as applied to bar a products-liability claim filed within the ordinary personal-injury limitations period after injury, violates Article I, § 5 of the Rhode Island Constitution (right to a “certain remedy” and “right to justice”).
2. Whether § 9-1-13(b) violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses.

## Decision

- The Rhode Island Supreme Court reversed the grant of summary judgment for Cumberland and remanded.
- The court held that § 9-1-13(b) was unconstitutional as applied under Article I, § 5 because it extinguished Kennedy’s claim despite his timely filing after the injury under the general limitations statute.
- Having resolved the case on state constitutional grounds, the court did not reach the federal due process and equal protection challenges.

## Legal Principles

- Article I, § 5 guarantees more than access to courts free from purchase; it also protects the availability of a “certain remedy” for recognized injuries.
- The legislature may regulate remedies (including by limitations periods) but may not eliminate or unreasonably restrict a personal-injury cause of action so that an injured person lacks a fair opportunity to enforce it.
- A statute of repose that bars a products-liability action solely because a fixed period has run from first purchase, even when the plaintiff sues promptly after injury, can violate Article I, § 5 as applied.

## Conclusion

The court invalidated the ten-year products statute of repose as applied to a plaintiff who sued within three years of injury, holding that the Rhode Island Constitution’s remedies clause forbids extinguishing a personal-injury claim before the injured person has a fair chance to obtain judicial redress.


Kennedy v. Cumberland Eng'g Co., 471 A.2d 195 (R.I. 1984)