Opening Thoughts on Statutes of Limitations on Construction Projects

hourglass on sandduneStatute of limitations defenses are a hotly litigated and important aspect of construction law.  This is particularly true in Virginia where the clock often starts ticking based on a literal bright line trigger.  This means the time for filing suit can often start running in Virginia before anyone even knows there is a case.  In construction litigation, where problems can stem from latent defects which do not manifest for an extended period, these rules can be pivotal in limiting risk.

This backdrop is in sharp relief when you consider the impact of the huge snow storms throughout the DC metro region this winter.  There are numerous roof collapse cases working their way throught the system.  A couple weeks ago, ENR highlighted a story from the Roanoke Times about the Blacksburg Virginia High School roof collapse.

What caught my eye in the story were these quotes:

The entire school remains closed as officials also examine the safety of classroom areas after engineers, in the wake of the gym collapse, found six concrete beams that did not meet 1974 building codes ... The school board filed several lawsuits against Fralin's company, along with other contractors and suppliers involved in the high school's construction, in 1977. Three suits were settled out of court in 1978 with the defendants agreeing to pay $371,000 to provide the school with a new roof.

Beyond the question of whether any claim is already settled by the prior litigation, going after parties involved in the design and construction of facilities built in 1977 has some significant potential timing hurdles.  As can be seen from the report below, the school is forced to address a very serious roof collapse at this point.

 

Most construction cases focus on a five year written (or occasionally three year unwritten) contract statute of limitations.  The rub comes in that the limitations period begins to run "when the breach of contract occurs in actions ex contractu and not when the resulting damage is discovered".  Cases looking at this issue in Virginia had generally stated that the owner suffers damage when a project is defectively built, not when those defects translate into problems such as a collapsed roof.

We have talked in passing regarding statute of limitations matters and statute of repose matters in the past, but we are going to delve into them a bit over several post over the next few weeks.  For those interested in looking at North Carolina law on the topic, our friend Melissa Brumback has recently covered limitations and repose issues under that state's law.

The Line Between Maintenance and Modification: What Constitutes an "Improvement" under Virginia's Statute of Repose

In a recent Fairfax Circuit Court case, Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Simpson Unlimited, Inc., the court wrestled with the issue of what exactly constitutes an “improvement” under Virginia’s statute of repose found in Virginia Code Section 8.01-250.

Three Flint Hill Partnership, RLLP designated Simpson Unlimited Inc. to act as in independent contractor on a building construction project, requiring Simpson to repair and replace exterior building components, including removing and replacing terrace soffits on the eighth floor, as well as cleaning other building surfaces. Simpson submitted its application for final payment on December 4, 2002, and was paid for its work on December 16, 2002.

On December 20, 2004, there was a water leak on the eighth floor, causing damage to areas of the building occupied by tenants. Travelers Indemnity did not file suit until March 18, 2009, claiming that the water leak was related to work that Simpson performed under its contract with Three Flint.

Under these facts, Section 8.01-243 (B), the statute of limitations for property damage, gave Travelers Indemnity five years from December 20, 2004, the date the water leak damaged the building and the cause of action therefore accrued. Therefore, Travelers Indemnity’s claim would survive the statute of limitations.

Getting creative, Simpson instead filed a plea in bar based on the five-year statute of repose found in Section 8.01-250. Simpson argued that its work under the contract constituted an “improvement” allowing it to take advantage of the statute of repose, which began to run upon completion of the building project in 2002. Section 8.01-250 states:

No action to recover for any injury to property, real or person, or for bodily injury or wrongful death, arising out of the defective and unsafe condition of an improvement to real property, nor any action for contribution or indemnity for damages sustained as a result of such injury, shall be brought against any person performing or furnishing the design, planning, surveying, supervision of construction, or construction of such improvement to real property more than five years after the performance or furnishing of such services and construction….

Simpson claimed that the soffit replacement was an “improvement” because it enhanced the value of the building. Travelers Indemnity argued that the soffit replacement not an “improvement” because it was akin to a repair.

Judge Bellows analyzed dictionary definitions and opinions in other jurisdictions, ultimately agreeing with Travelers Indemnity and concluding that the soffit replacement was merely part of the normal upkeep and maintenance of the building rather than a modification or addition of the building, and therefore not an “improvement” that would allow Simpson to take advantage of the statute of repose.
 

Huge Snowfall Leads to Wave of Roof Collapses

Washington Snowstorm Lincoln MemorialSo, here in the Washington, DC area we are buried under a couple feet of snow.  You know we have a lot of snow when the Lincoln Memorial steps have been transformed into a good tobogan run.  Unfortunately, so much snow means a ton of dead load placed on roof structures.  There are a number of roof collapses reported around the area.  So far, the major blessing is it appears that none of these events have led to any serious personal injuries.  You can definitely expect that these significant collapse events will trigger equally significant property damage claims, business interruption issues, and perhaps threaten the long-term viability of some businesses.  These events include:

Here is a news report on the Baileys Crossroads roof collapse from WJLA:

With the threat of more snow potentially on the way, the region may not have seen the last of these problems.  Building owners may face some significant hurdles to full recovery, including finding out the limitations of their insurance policies, facing problems with statutes of limitations and/or statutes of repose, and finding that responsible parties are casualties of the current economic crisis and thus are judgment proof.  All of these factors point to a few very important lessons:

  • Know and understand your insurance coverage and its limitations before you have problems
  • When shopping for insurance, evaluate risk and consider not just shopping for the lowest price; you may find that going cheap on insurance ultimately costs you far more
  • Know and understand applicable statutes of limitations and statutes of repose prior to entering into design, construction, or property purchase agreements
  • Factor in the impacts of these time limitation issues when you asses the appropriate levels and types of insurance your purchase
  • Do your homework - conducting detailed inspections prior to purchase and properly evaluating the strength and credentials of your consultants and contractors is an investment of time and money, but it is worth it in the long run rather than face a catastrophic loss in the future

Image by vpickering