Author Archives: Melissa Dewey Brumback

Those Pesky “Gentlemen’s Agreements”

Posted on by

handshake

Head on over to Construction Law Musings today to read my guest post on why you should never rely on a “gentlemen’s agreement” for a construction project.  Handshakes are well and good, but put it in writing.  Same goes for any agreement, really.  Read, review, and understand your contracts, settlement agreements, and warranty deeds.

 A written document almost always trumps oral “understandings,” so why chance your business to anything less?

________________________

Photo “handshake I” by oooh.oooh [Álvaro Canivell] via Flickr via Creative Commons License.

 

Construction Law Musings: Sneak Peek

Posted on by

Regular readers know that “Construction Law Musings,” written by Virginia attorney Christopher Hill, has been a regular on my blogroll since its inception.  Chris regularly features guest writers for his series “Guest Post Fridays.”  He has graciously invited me to be tomorrow’s Guest Author.

pencilPlease visit his blog tomorrow to read all about the scary concept of “gentlemen’s agreements” in the construction contest.  Until then, you might enjoy visiting some of Chris’ earlier posts at “Musings“.

____________________

Clip Art licensed from Clip Art Gallery on DiscoverySchool.com. 

 

Exception to the Statute of Repose?

Posted on by

Hold the phone– didn’t I just say last week that the statute of repose was basically an absolute bar to any action after 6 years?  Why, yes, yes I did.

BUT it too has exceptions!  (If you’ve learned anything from my rantings, I hope it is that there is always an exception to the rule).  In a recent Court of Appeals case, the application of the statute of repose was called into question.

In Dawson v. N.C. Dept of Environment and Natural Resources (June 15, 2010), a couple bought land only after inquiring of the Person County health department to determine that the lots perked.  Based on a 1989 letter issued by the health department stating that the lots perked, the couple bought the land.  In 2000 (that is, 11 years later!), the couple applied for building permits only to learn from DENR that the land was not suitable for building.

The couple sued DENR under a negligence theory, and DENR argued the time bar of the 6 year statute of repose.  In its decision, the court held that because the 1989 letter was not based on an improvement to real property, the statute of repose was not applicable.  The Court indicated that, had the county inspector been inspecting an existing septic system, their decision may have been different.

Moral of the story? Just because you think you have a good defense, don’t forget that there is always an exception to the rule or, rather, there are many times when the shoe looks like it fits, but it really doesn’t.  Be careful– blisters are painful!

boot

Photo “Dakota Composite Dual Toe” by Bottinex via Flickr via Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Sharealike license 

Tues Tip: Free Construction Marketing seminars

Posted on by

Recently I was contacted by  a digital marketing agency in Portland, OR about their upcoming series of free 45 minute seminars called “Compelling Action Through Internet Marketing in the Construction Industry”.

Each Thursday for the next several Thursdays, they are running a Web-based Seminar at 11:00 AM PDT (That’s 2:00PM EDT).  The agenda includes:

  • The Basics of Internet Marketing – What is it?  Why is it Relevant?
  • Paid Search Advertising
  • Opportunities in Internet Marketing
  • Compelling Action and How to Succeed in Internet Marketing
  • How Internet Marketing Applies to the Construction Industry

Disclaimer:  I have not yet attended this Webinar myself, but it looks promising.  I plan to attend the one this Thursday.  If you plan to attend any of the sessions, let me know what you think.

 

construction sign

 

Statute of Repose: Putting your Risk to Bed

Posted on by

Ferret's new hammock

Last week, I discussed the statute of limitations  and how it is generally applied to North Carolina construction projects.  Today, I want to introduce you to another important concept: the statute of repose.

What is the Statute of Repose?

The Statute of Repose is another time-barring statute within which your claim must fit. Like the statute of limitations, it depends on what state’s law will apply to your case, which is usually, but not always, the state where the project is located.

The Statute of Repose, under N.C. Gen. Stat. §1-50(a)(5)(a) provides:

“No action to recover damages based upon or arising out of the defective or unsafe conditions of an improvement to real property shall be brought more than six years from the later of the specific last act or omission of the defendant giving rise to the cause of action or substantial completion of the improvement.”

When does it run for North Carolina construction projects?

The Statute of Repose in North Carolina for improvements to real property is currently six (6) years from substantial completion or the last specific act or omission of  the defendant, whichever is later. N.C. Gen. Stat. §1-50(a)(5)(a); Nolan v. Paramount Homes, Inc., 135 N.C. App 73, 518 S.E.2d 789 (1999).  Once you have been off of a job for 6 years, you cannot (successfully) be sued for any construction defect, regardless of when the defect was or is discovered.  It is an extreme, bright line bar to any claim after that time; that is, it puts your risk to bed.

How is it different from the Statute of Limitations?

Unlike the Statute of Limitations, the Statute of Repose starts running whether or not you are aware of any defect.  Bryant v. Don Galloway Homes, Inc.,, 147 N.C. App. 655, 556 S.E.2d 597 (2001). This is a double-edged sword—if you are the one whose work is being questioned, you can rest easy that after you have been off of a project for 6 years, no claim can thereafter be (successfully) brought against you.

On the other hand, you are also bound by the repose statute, regardless of any equitable considerations. For example, in Monson v. Paramount Homes, Inc., homeowners sued a general contractor for defective construction, and the contractor brought a third-party action against his subcontractor. The claims against the subcontractor were deemed time-barred under the statute of repose.  133 N.C. App. 235,515 S.E.2d 445 (1999). In Monson, the contractor had to defend the action but had no ability to recover from the subcontractor who actually performed the poor construction.

Does punch list or warranty work extend the Statute of Repose?

In most cases, no.  Once the statute of repose starts to run, it generally cannot be tolled by any subsequent action.  For example, in one case, even when the contractor had performed some punch list work after substantial completion, and even though the architect failed to issue a certificate of substantial completion, the court held that the statute began to run at the date of substantial completion of the contractor’s work.  Mitchell v. Mitchell’s Formal Wear, Inc, 168 N.C. App, 212, 606 S.E.2d 704 (2005).

This is also true if you return to the job for minor warranty type issues during the 6 year period. The statute of limitations is tolled during the repair time, but in general, the statute of repose is not tolled once it begins running. The policy behind this interpretation is that the Statute of Repose is a substantive right designed to limit the potential liability for a set period of time.

 ___________________________

Photo “Cama nova do furas / Ferret’s new hammock” by Isa Costa via Flickr via Attribution-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic Creative Commons license.