This matter questions addresses the issue as to whether or not a contractor who completed a contract for construction of a professional baseball stadium for the benefit of the State of Washington. At first glance it appears that  RCW 4.16.160 would provide for an exemption from the six-year statute of limitations (“repose”). However,  RCW 4.16.300 does bar the State of Washington from a cause of action against the contractor if six-years after substantial completion of construction  has passed; and the contractor has not retained possession and control of the improvement at the time such cause of action accrues. The contractor’s position is supported by the following IRAC. 

Issue: Is a lawsuit against a contractor for construction defects in a professional baseball stadium an action “for the benefit of the state,” under RCW 4.16.160, which would exempt the action from the six-year statute of “repose” (limitations) provided in RCW 4.16.310?

Rule:RCW 4.16.160

Application of limitations to actions by state, counties, municipalities.

The limitations prescribed in this chapter shall apply to actions brought in the name or for the benefit of any county or other municipality or quasimunicipality of the state, in the same manner as to actions brought by private parties: PROVIDED, That, except as provided in RCW 4.16.310, there shall be no limitation to actions brought in the name or for the benefit of the state, and no claim of right predicated upon the lapse of time shall ever be asserted against the state: AND FURTHER PROVIDED, That no previously existing statute of limitations shall be interposed as a defense to any action brought in the name or for the benefit of the state, although such statute may have run and become fully operative as a defense prior to February 27, 1903, nor shall any cause of action against the state be predicated upon such a statute (emphasis added).

 Rule:RCW 4.16.310

Actions or claims arising from construction, alteration, repair, design, planning, survey, engineering, etc., of improvements upon real property—Accrual and limitations of actions or claims.

All claims or causes of action as set forth in RCW 4.16.300 shall accrue, and the applicable statute of limitation shall begin to run only during the period within six years after substantial completion of construction, or during the period within six years after the termination of the services enumerated in RCW 4.16.300, whichever is later. The phrase "substantial completion of construction" shall mean the state of completion reached when an improvement upon real property may be used or occupied for its intended use. Any cause of action which has not accrued within six years after such substantial completion of construction, or within six years after such termination of services, whichever is later, shall be barred: PROVIDED, That this limitation shall not be asserted as a defense by any owner, tenant or other person in possession and control of the improvement at the time such cause of action accrues. The limitations prescribed in this section apply to all claims or causes of action as set forth in RCW 4.16.300 brought in the name or for the benefit of the state which are made or commenced after June 11, 1986 (emphasis added).

 

 

Application:RCW 416.300 does allow an exception to the six year statute of limitation, if the defendant was in possession and control of the improvement at the time such cause of action accrues. In order for a plaintiff to overcome the six year statute of limitations, the contractor must have remained in possession and control of the improvement at the time such action accrued.

Conclusion:If six or more years have passed since the contractor remained in possession and control of the improvement, the six year statute of limitations described in RCW 4.1630.10 would apply and the plaintiff would be barred from bringing suit against the contractor. 

-------------------------------------

This is my law group project and that is my draft of the case .  Please write a page of representing PFD/Mariners.