Embree v. American Continental Corp.
| Citation | 684 P.2d 951 |
| Decision Date | 21 June 1984 |
| Docket Number | No. 83CA0067,83CA0067 |
| Parties | John EMBREE and Linda Embree, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. AMERICAN CONTINENTAL CORPORATION, an Ohio Corporation, d/b/a Medema Homes, Defendant-Appellee. . II |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Colorado |
Hornbein, MacDonald, Fattor & Buckley, P.C., Donald P. MacDonald, Rhett K. Dacus, Denver, for plaintiffs-appellants.
George Alan Holley & Associates, Scott D. Albertson, Golden, for defendant-appellee.
Plaintiffs, John and Linda Embree (buyers), appeal a summary judgment dismissing their action against defendant, American Continental Corp., d/b/a Medema Homes, Inc. (builder vendor), as barred by the statute of limitations applicable to actions against builder vendors. We affirm.
Buyers contracted with builder vendor for the construction and sale of a home on a lot selected by them. The house was completed and the deal was closed in November 1977. At that time buyers complained that the lot grading was not what they had been told it was going to be. When builder vendor refused to correct the grading, buyers had the work done at their own expense in 1979 and 1980.
In September 1981, buyers commenced this lawsuit, seeking damages from builder vendor for its failure to grade and level their lot as agreed, based on claims of fraudulent representations, negligent misrepresentations, and breach of express warranty. In its answer, builder vendor raised the affirmative defense of the statute of limitations, § 13-80-127, C.R.S. (effective July 1, 1979, as amended) (1983 Cum.Supp.). The trial court held that buyers were barred by this statute, and granted builder vendor's summary judgment motion.
This statute provides, in pertinent part:
....
The only issue on this appeal is whether the trial court erred in holding that buyers' claims are barred by the above statute...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Shaw Constr., LLC v. United Builder Servs., Inc.
...P.2d at 407 (installing an indicator light fixture as part of a grain elevator's electrical auger system); Embree v. American Continental Corp., 684 P.2d 951, 952 (Colo.App.1984) (grading a lot before constructing a home); see also McClanahan v. American Gilsonite Co., 494 F.Supp. 1334, 134......
-
Highline Village Assocs. v. Hersh Cos., 98CA1886.
...P.2d 827, 829 (Colo.App.1996). Thus, activities such as the grading of a lot in preparation for construction, Embree v. American Continental Corp., 684 P.2d 951 (Colo.App.1984), and the attachment of personal property to realty, whether or not such attachment results in the creation of a fi......
-
Barron v. Kerr-Mcgee Rocky Mountain Corp.
...garage "was an essential and predominant part" of the garage and therefore was an improvement to real property); Embree v. Am. Cont'l Corp., 684 P.2d 951, 952 (Colo.App.1984) (grading to lot was an improvement to real property because it "is essential and integral to the construction and co......
-
Watkins v. Tankersley Construction, Inc., No. W2004-00869-COA-R3-CV (TN 6/29/2005), W2004-00869-COA-R3-CV.
...but, as a drainage pond, borrow pit No. 6 was itself an improvement. The appellate court cited with approval Embree v. American Cont'l Corp., 684 P.2d 951 (Colo. Ct. App. 1984), wherein it was held that the grading of a lot was an "improvement to real property." Id. at *4. The appellate cou......