Construction Law – Statutes of Limitations and Repose

Even though the property owner knew of its injury more than two years before it filed its demand for arbitration, the two-year statute of limitations found in Minn. Stat. sec. 541.051 (2006) does not bar the property owner’s warranty claims because a breach-of-warranty claim does not accrue until the property owner had reasons to know that the contractors were unable or unwilling to honor their warranties; the property owner in this case had no reason to know, before notifying the contractors that the warranties were at issue, that the contractors were not going to perform under their warranties of future performance; and the property owner’s warranty claims accrued less than two years before it submitted its arbitration demand.

Because appellant contractors’ statute-of-repose argument was presented to, but not ruled on by, the District Court, and is an alternative ground on which to affirm the judgment appealed, the contractors were not required to file a notice of review to preserve the statute-of-repose argument for appeal.

Because there is no genuine dispute that the property owner knew of its injury more than two years before it filed its demand for arbitration, the statute of limitations found in Minn. Stat. sec. 541.051 bars the non-warranty claims.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.