1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.W.2d
  4. 645 N.W.2d
  5. 645 N.W.2d 487 (2002)
 

DAKOTA v. BWBR ARCHITECTS

No. C5-01-2194.

645 N.W.2d 487 (2002)

DAKOTA County, a public body corporate and politic, Appellant, v. BWBR ARCHITECTS, Inc., M.A. Mortenson Company, Inc., George W. Olsen Construction Company, Inc., A.J. Spanjers Company, Inc., Division 7 Corporation, and Transamerica Assurance Company of California, f/k/a Transamerica Insurance Company, a California corporation, Respondents, and Dalbec Roofing, Inc., Transamerica Premium Insurance Company, a California corporation, Employer's Insurance of Wausau, and AmWest Surety Insurance Company, Defendants.

Court of Appeals of Minnesota.

June 4, 2002.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Jeffrey C. Paulson, David D. Hammargren, Paul T. Meyer, Hammargren, Meyer & Paulson, P.A., Minneapolis, for appellant.

Thomas F. Nelson, Michael G. Taylor, Robert L. Smith, Leonard, Street & Deinard, Minneapolis, for respondent BWBR Architects.

Timothy M. O'Brien, John H. Hinderaker, Deborah J. Mackay, Faegre & Benson, P.L.L.P., Minneapolis, for respondent M.A. Mortenson Company.

James A. Reding, Jr., Lars C. Erickson, Reding & Pilney, Oakdale, and David Snyder, Eckberg, Lammers, Briggs, Wolff & Vierling, Stillwater, for respondent George W. Olsen Company.

Patrick Sweeney, JoAnn C. Toth, Spence, Ricke, Sweeney & Gernes, P.A., St. Paul, and Stanley E. Siegel, Rider, Bennett, Egan & Arundel, LLP, Minneapolis, for respondent A.J. Spanjers Company.

Kristine A. Kubes, Amy R. Baudler, Thomas R. Olson & Associates, St. Paul, for respondent Division 7 Corporation.

Ronald E. Martell, Moore, Costello & Hart, P.L.L.P., Minneapolis, for respondent Transamerica Assurance Company of California.

Considered and decided by KLAPHAKE, Presiding Judge, HANSON, Judge, and FOLEY, Judge.

OPINION

KLAPHAKE, Judge.

Appellant challenges the grant of summary judgment to respondents, dismissing its claims for damages for defects to real property arising out of a construction project. Because more than two years passed after appellant should reasonably have discovered an actionable injury, we conclude that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment. Further, because any fraud or...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases