Nash

Nash v. MacDonald

Good Law
112 Cal. Rptr. 2d 230·2001 D.A.R. 10·92 Cal. App. 4th 847
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 2, 2001A090825California4,659 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gary P. Oswald, San Rafael, Elizabeth E. Bader, San Francisco, Appellants.

Eisen & Johnston, Jay-Allen Eisen, Marian M. Johnston, K. Greg Peterson, Jeffory J. Scharff, Sacramento, Frederick A. Belt, Placerville, for Respondent Julia I. Carrington.

Edward R. MacDonald, in pro. per.

KAY, J.

Plaintiffs appeal from the judgment determining they are entitled to recover nothing from defendants for allegedly causing damage to plaintiffs' real property. The judgment was entered after the trial court had previously made an order granting defendants summary adjudication on plaintiffs' cause of action for strict liability. The judgment itself determines that plaintiffs' remaining causes of action were time-barred by Code of Civil Procedure section 337.1, [1] which the trial court identified as the applicable statute of limitations for patent defects of real property. Plaintiffs contend the trial court erred in: (1) determining that there was no legal basis for their strict liability claim; and (2) not treating the defect as latent, and thus governed by section 337.15. We agree with plaintiffs on both points and therefore reverse.

This appeal is simplified by considerable agreement on…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.