Posted On: May 18, 2009 by Meriwether & Tharp

Simple Construction Contracts: Statute of Limitations - Georgia Case Law Update

The Georgia Court of Appeals recently upheld a trial court ruling in the case of Wilks v. Overall Constr. Inc. that the 6 year statute of limitations from O.C.G.A. §9-3-24 applies for lawsuits to be filed in simple construction contract cases. This case makes two extremely important points: (1) people must abide by the time limits contained in the Official Code of Georgia if they want to ensure that their disputes will be heard; and (2) if you suspect something was constructed incorrectly, do NOT wait until you notice problems to have it inspected.

In this case, a homeowner hired a contractor to perform some construction on his home. This work was governed by a written contract signed by the parties. The work was completed on or about July 23, 1999, at which time the homeowner paid the contractor. Within a year, the homeowner began noticing problems, and over the course of the next 5 years, the contractor returned to perform repair work. Even after all of the repairs, the homeowner still noticed construction problems, and finally hired an engineer to inspect the construction in June 2007. The inspection revealed that there were deficiencies in the construction and the materials used, which prompted the homeowner to file suit in July 2007 for breach of contract – almost 8 years after the work was initially completed! Unfortunately for the home owner, he had waited too long to bring suit under the applicable statute of limitations, which resulted in dismissal of his lawsuit.

The important lesson to take from this case is that if you file suit for breach of a simple construction contract, you MUST make sure to do so within 6 years after work was substantially completed. Do NOT simply allow a contractor to make repairs, as the statute of limitations will not be adjusted to run from the most recent repair date. If only the homeowner in the Wilks case had ordered the inspection earlier, he could have filed suit prior to July 2005, thus ensuring that his case was heard.

Bookmark and Share