Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Real Estate Marketing, Inc. v. Franz, 885 S.W.2d 921 (1994)

Citation
Real Estate Marketing, Inc. v. Franz, 885 S.W.2d 921 (1994)
Parent Document
Real Estate Marketing, Inc. v. Franz, 885 S.W.2d 921 (1994)
Jurisdiction
Kentucky (state)
Effective Date
1994-10-27

Other Sections in This Document (62)

Full Text

1,169 chars
The Court of Appeals reversed on this issue, opining that there are factual issues upon which the application of the statute depends, most significantly First Lexington’s alleged failure to make adequate repairs when responding to the Careys’ warranty claim under the Homeowners Warranty Insurance Policy. But the basic premise underlying the Franzes’ claim regarding the statute of limitations is broader than whether the running of limitations was temporarily tolled by the attempted repairs. The Franzes assert the discovery rule: the time bar on liability premised on concealed, latent structural defects in the construction of their home did not begin to run until such defects were discovered or reasonably discoverable. The Franzes assert that the proper test for determining when a cause of action accrues in construction cases should be to determine when the injured party discovers (or should have discovered) that the damage or injury has occurred and that it has resulted from the negligence of the builder. The Franzes cite Hibbard v. Taylor, Ky., 837 S.W.2d 500 (1992), applying the discovery rule in the context of a cause of action for legal negligence.