Construction Law

                A Florida district court found that a condominium association had 4 years during which it could bring action against a contractor, developer, and architect for construction defects. Saltponds Condominium Association (Association) was developed by SPC Developers (Developer). Walbridge Aldinger (Contractor), the defendant, was one of the contractors on the project. The Association later filed a suit against the Contractor, Developer and the project architect alleging defects in construction. The Association claimed that the alleged defects could not be noticed by persons who did not have special knowledge in construction.

            The defendants asked that the court dismiss the complaint of the Association because it was filed after the allowable time under the law. The trial court agreed but did not specify what the statute of limitation or the time limit to file was. The Association appealed.

            The Contractor claimed that the statute of limitations was 3 years and should run from the date of completion of the project. The court of appeals disagreed and, based on cases and statutory language, concluded that the statute of limitations should run starting with the time the Association gets control of the project. Also, if the defect is not apparent, then the time should start running from the time the defect was or should have been detected.     

            The Association took ownership of the condominium complex on August 1, 2002 and filed suit against the Contractor on August 21, 2006, over the allowable four years. Nevertheless, the court found that because the plaintiff?s complaint mentioned that the Association had given the Contractor notice and opportunity of repair within four years, it may avoid the statute of limitations requirement. Also, the four years runs from the time the defects should have been detected. In addition, the complaint did not conclusively show that the defects should have been detected upon transfer of control to the Association, leaving more uncertainty about when the statute of limitations began to run.

            The lower court, therefore, mistakenly dismissed the Association's complaint.

            This site and any information contained herein is intended for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. Seek a competent attorney for advice on any legal matter.