PER CURIAM.
Affirmed on the authority of Shaw v. General Motors Corp., 503 So.2d 362 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). As in Shaw, we certify to the Supreme Court of Florida the following questions as being of great public importance:
I. Should the legislative amendment of Section 95.031(2), Florida Statutes (1983), abolishing the statute of repose in product liability actions, be construed to operate retrospectively as to a cause of action which accrued
before the effective date of the amendment?
II. If not, should the decision of
Pullman v. Cincinnati, Inc., 476 So.2d 657 (Fla. 1985),
appeal dismissed,
___ U.S. ___,
106 S.Ct. 1626,
90 L.Ed.2d 174 (1986), which overruled
Battilla v. Allis Chalmers Mfg. Co., 392 So.2d 874 (Fla. 1980), apply so as to bar a cause of action that accrued after the
Battilla decision but before the
Pullum decision?
Affirmed.