Robinson

Robinson v. CHIN & HENSOLT

Good Law
120 Cal. Rptr. 2d 49·98 Cal. App. 4th 702
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 21, 2002A095725California4,509 words

Opinion

Opinion

Marchiano, J.

This case involves San Francisco’s “pretty cable cars, that climb halfway to the stars.” But after they make that storied climb, they have to return. Several cable car lines use rotating turnarounds to change the direction of the cars. The issue before us is whether the three cable car turnarounds—at the intersections of Powell and Market, Beach and Hyde, and Bay and Taylor—are improvements to realty or personalty. We agree with the trial court that the turnarounds are not personal property but are improvements to real property for purposes of the statute of limitations in Code of Civil Procedure section 337.1.

Appellants are 14 cable car operators. Respondents, defendants below, are the various contractors and subcontractors involved in the design and renovation of the cable car system between 1982 and 1984. In 1999, appellants sued respondents for personal injuries arising from respondents’ alleged defective design and construction of the cable car turnarounds. Respondents moved for summary judgment on the ground that appellants’ personal injury claims were based on patent design and construction defects in improvements to real property, and were thus time-barred by…

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.