Legal Opinion

INCO DEVELOPMENT CORP. v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 4, 2005No. E036800PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

WARD, J. —

Under the circumstances of this case we hold that the tolling provision contained in Code of Civil Procedure section 356 1 does not apply to extend the 10-year period set forth in section 337.15 within which plaintiffs can file actions based on latent construction defects. As a result we find that certain of the consolidated actions are time-barred so that the trial court was required to grant the summary judgment motion brought on that basis by defendants Inco Development Corporation and Inco Homes Corporation (Inca). We, therefore, grant Inco’s petition for writ of mandate…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Woods v. YoungCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
  2. Lantzy v. Centex HomesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
  3. Simon v. NavonCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1997
  4. Miguel v. Country Funding Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
  5. Robert A. Husmann v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1999

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Pga W. Residential Ass'n, Inc. v. Hulven Int'l, Inc., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
  2. Brisbane Lodging, L.P. v. Webcor Builders, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2013
  3. Donell v. KeppersDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2011
  4. San Diego Unified School District v. County of San DiegoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
  5. Lewow v. Surfside III Condominium Owners Ass'n., Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2012

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API