Legal Opinion

Brigham Young University v. Paulsen Construction Co.

Utah Supreme Court

Decided October 27, 1987No. 19638PublishedCited by 39 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ZIMMERMAN, Justice:

This is an appeal from a judgment on the pleadings entered in favor of Paulsen Construction Company (“Paulsen”) and Chris-tiansen Brothers & Associates, Inc. (“Chris-tiansen”), against Brigham Young University (“BYU”). The district court held that BYU’s claims against the two construction contractors are barred because they were not brought within the three-year period of limitation imposed by section 78-12-26(1) of the Code. Before this Court, BYU contends that the six-year limitation period of section 78-12-23(2) should apply and that the statute did not begin to run on…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. North Carolina State Ports Authority v. Lloyd A. Fry Roofing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
  2. Myers v. McDonaldUtah Supreme Court · 1981
  3. Lumbermen's Mutual Casualty Co. v. Pattillo Construction Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1985
  4. Becton Dickinson and Co. v. ReeseUtah Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Bracklein v. Realty Ins. Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1938

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

3Cited by39 opinions

  1. Russell Packard Development, Inc. v. CarsonUtah Supreme Court · 2005
  2. Ward v. Intermountain Farmers Ass'nUtah Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Bauman v. DayAlaska Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Berenda v. LangfordUtah Supreme Court · 1996
  5. Warren v. Provo City Corp.Utah Supreme Court · 1992

34 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