 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Carven v. Hickman12/22/2000
nder the contract, the statute of repose would be relevant to a claim for that property damage. Id.
We find the reasoning of that court sound. We therefore conclude that a purely financial injury , such as that claimed by appellants, does not fall within the purview of the Maryland statute of repose. The diminution in the value of a residential property caused by the discovery of the presence of a cemetery on that property and the cost of disinterring the bodies of that graveyard are not the injury to personal or real property, or personal injury , contemplated by the Maryland statute of repose.
Because we find that none of the elements of the first requirement set forth in Rose for statute of repose coverage are satisfied, we need not consider the second requirement (whether 20 years passed since the `entire improvement first bec available for its intended use.'").
CONCLUSION
In sum, we find that the circuit court erred in granting summary judgment based on the statute of repose, because appellants' claims did not involve a personal injury or an injury to personal or real property resulting from a defective and unsafe condition of an improvement to real property. Accordingly, we shall reverse the judgment of the circuit court and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR WORCESTER COUNTY REVERSED AND CASE REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS CONSISTENT WITH THIS OPINION.
COSTS TO BE PAID BY APPELLEES.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Maryland Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|