The defendants brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiff's action regarding the defective construction of a storage building.
The defendants argued they owed no duty of care because they followed the plaintiff's specifications for ventilation, and that the action was statute-barred.
The court dismissed the motion, finding the defendants failed to meet their evidentiary burden to show there was no genuine issue requiring a trial regarding their duty of care and reliance.
The court also found the evidence did not establish the claim was discovered outside the two-year limitation period.
