Skip to main content

California Court of Appeal


ROBINSON v. CHIN & HENSOLT, A095725

Three San Francisco cable car "turnarounds" are not personal property, but are improvements to real property, for purposes of the statute of limitations in Code of Civil Procedure section 337.1, thus dismissal of claims for defective design and construction was proper.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 05/22/2002
  • Published 05/22/2002

Judges

  • MARCHIANO, P.J.

Court

  • California Court of Appeal

Counsel

  • For Appellant:
  •  Laurence F. Padway,Law Offices of Laurence F. Padway, Alameda, for Plaintiffs and Appellants.

  • For Appellees:
  • Douglas M. Gooding, Gooding, Shinnick, Golub, Holt & Andersen, San Francisco, for Defendant and Respondent Homer J. Olsen, Inc., H. James Wulfsberg, William L. Darby, David Darroch, Wulfsberg Reese & Sykes PC, for Defendant and Respondent San Francisco Construction Management, Inc., David E. Eriksen, Maureen E. McTague, Severson & Werson, San Francisco, for Defendant and Respondent Chin & Hensolt., Robert A. Ford, Stephen J. Gorog, Lewis, D'Amato, Brisbois & Bisgaard, for Defendant and Respondent AMT Metal Fabricators, Inc.,  Richard Fike, David Collins, Gordon & Rees, LLP, for Defendant and Respondent Underground Railco.
Copied to clipboard