Henderson Clay Products, Inc. v. Edgar Wood & Associates, Inc.
| Decision Date | 08 September 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 81-379,81-379 |
| Parties | HENDERSON CLAY PRODUCTS, INC. v. EDGAR WOOD & ASSOCIATES, INC. |
| Court | New Hampshire Supreme Court |
Laflamme, Champagne & Moquin, P. A., Manchester (Robert L. Hermann, Jr., Manchester, on brief and orally), for plaintiff.
Sheehan, Phinney, Bass & Green, P. A., Manchester (Stephen E. Weyl, Manchester, on brief and Daniel N. Gregoire, Manchester, on brief and orally), for defendant.
This case comes to us on appeal from the granting, pursuant to RSA 508:4-b, of a motion to dismiss an indemnity claim. The motion was granted by the Superior Court (Goode, J.) upon the recommendation of the Master (Perkins, J., Ret.). We reverse.
The facts giving rise to the dismissal are briefly as follows. Vickery Realty Company Trust is the owner of the Nashua Mall which was constructed in the late 1960's and which was designed by Edgar H. Wood & Associates, Inc., the defendant in the present case. The defendant's architectural services with respect to the construction of the mall were fully performed on or before June 1, 1969, which was the completion date of the Woolco Department Store building, one of the enterprises located in the mall. In December 1980, Vickery Realty brought suit against the plaintiff Henderson Clay Products, Inc., alleging that the face of the bricks supplied by the plaintiff and used in the construction of the Woolco Department Store building were peeling, falling apart and generally disintegrating. Damages in the amount of $80,000 were sought in the underlying action against the plaintiff Henderson Clay Products. Henderson Clay Products filed an indemnity suit against Edgar H. Wood & Associates, Inc., on February 9, 1981, claiming that the damage to the Nashua Mall building "was the result of defendant's [Edgar H. Wood & Associates, Inc.] negligent design, improper setting forth of product specifications and use of products ... improper supervision of construction and failure to provide specifications and plans...."
The defendant, relying upon the provisions of RSA 508:4-b, filed a motion to dismiss, claiming that the indemnity action was barred by the statute of limitations because it was brought more than six years after the completion of the performance of the architectural services. The plaintiff claims that the classification adopted by the legislature in the statute under consideration violates the equal protection clauses of the United States Constitution, amendment XIV and the New Hampshire Constitution, part I, articles 1 and 12. We agree.
The substance of the plaintiff's claim, simply stated, is that materialmen and suppliers of labor are burdened by a six-year statute of limitations which begins to run upon discovery of the cause of action while architects are relieved from liability six years after the performance of their services irrespective of the fact that the cause of action is not discovered until later. RSA 508:4-b provides a six-year statute of limitations for architects which in effect computes liability exposure from different starting dates with respect to materialmen and suppliers of labor. What becomes a six-year statu...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Blaske v. Smith & Entzeroth, Inc., Nos. 73588
...41 (1986) (holding that the five year statute of repose violated special legislation clause); Henderson Clay Products, Inc. v. Edgar Wood & Associates, Inc., 122 N.H. 800, 451 A.2d 174 (1982) (holding the statute of respose unconstitutionally discriminatory); Broome v. Truluck, 270 S.C. 227......
-
Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. Lawrence, Dykes, Goodenberger, Bower & Clancy
...276 (1982); State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. v. All Electric, Inc., Nev., 660 P.2d 995 (1983); Henderson Clay Products, Inc. v. Edgar Wood & Associates, Inc., 122 N.H. 800, 451 A.2d 174 (1982); Loyal Order of Moose, Lodge 1785 v. Cavaness, 563 P.2d 143 (Okla.1977); Broome v. Truluck, 270 S.......
-
Zapata v. Burns
...cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 107 S.Ct. 89, 93 L.Ed.2d 41 (1986) (similar conclusion); Henderson Clay Products, Inc. v. Edgar Wood & Associates, Inc., 122 N.H. 800, 802, 451 A.2d 174 (1982) (all who participate in the enterprise should be held to account for their share of the blame). We dis......
-
Alexander v. Beech Aircraft Corp., 88-1749
...statute); Shessel v. Stroup, 253 Ga. 56, 316 S.E.2d 155, 158 (1984) (medical malpractice); Henderson Clay Products, Inc. v. Edgar Woods & Assocs., Inc., 122 N.H. 800, 451 A.2d 174 (1982); Broome v. Truluck, 270 S.C. 227, 241 S.E.2d 739, 740-41 (1978) (construction statute); Loyal Order of M......