Legal Opinion
Rosenheimer v. Tidal Construction Co.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided June 19, 2001No. A01A0680PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Ruffin, Judge.
Robert Rosenheimer and Victoria Soland (the plaintiffs) purchased a new home built by Tidal Construction Company (Tidal). After discovering an alleged moisture problem with the synthetic stucco exterior of the house, the plaintiffs sued Tidal and Colormatch Exteriors, Inc. (Colormatch), the company that manufactured the synthetic stucco. The defendants moved for summary judgment, asserting that all of plaintiffs’ claims were barred by the statute of limitation. The trial court granted defendants’ motions, and this appeal ensued. For reasons that follow, we reverse.
To prevail on…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Swan Kang, Inc. v. Tae Sang Kang (Yi)Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2000
- Bauer v. North Fulton Medical Center, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1999
- Mitchell v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2000
- Stimson v. George Laycock, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2000
- Hickey v. BowdenCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2001
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Western Pacific Mutual Insurance v. DaviesCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2004
- Colormatch Exteriors, Inc. v. HickeySupreme Court of Georgia · 2002
- Feinour v. Ricker Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2002
- Gropper v. STO CORP.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2001
- Scully v. 1ST MAGNOLIA HOMES, INC.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2004