McCaulley v. C L Enters., 309 Neb. 141

In 2006 the McCaulleys acted as their own general contractor and hired multiple independent contractors for discrete portions of a new home (plumbing, roofing, masonry, floors, windows/doors, waterproofing, retaining wall).
They moved into the home in late Feb/early Mar 2008 and filed suit on Feb 7, 2012 against 12 contractors, alleging negligence and implied-breach-of-warranty claims (express warranties were not pleaded).
Seven contractors at issue moved for summary judgment under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-223 (four-year limitations), asserting the limitations period began on the date each contractor substantially completed its individual work.
The district court found no dispute as to each contractor’s substantial completion date, held the § 25-223 period began on each contractor’s completion date, granted summary judgment as time-barred, and denied the homeowners’ oral motion to file a fourth amended complaint to add an express warranty-to-repair claim.
The McCaulleys appealed, arguing the limitations period should run from substantial completion of the entire home and that denial of leave to amend was an abuse of discretion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
When does the § 25-223 4-year limitations period begin when a homeowner contracts separately with multiple trades?	Limitations should run from substantial completion of the entire home (late Feb/early Mar 2008).	Limitations run from the substantial completion date of each contractor's separate contracted work.	Court: Where owner hired separate contractors for discrete projects, § 25-223 runs from each contractor's substantial completion of its project; claims were time-barred.
Whether denial of leave to amend (to add an express warranty-to-repair claim) was an abuse of discretion	Amendment was warranted after Adams concurrence; could save claims that accrue post-completion.	Request was untimely, prejudicial, and potentially futile given summary judgment proceedings; defendants had prepared on operative pleading.	Court: Denial not an abuse of discretion — amendment would cause undue delay and unfair prejudice; affirmed.

Fuelberth v. Heartland Heating & Air Conditioning, 307 Neb. 1002 (2020) (explains divisible vs. indivisible construction projects and that § 25-223 begins to run at substantial completion of each separable project)
Adams v. Manchester Park, 291 Neb. 978 (2015) (applies substantial-completion rule to homebuilder/general-contractor claims; concurrence discussed warranty-to-repair accrual)
Murphy v. Spelts-Schultz Lumber Co., 240 Neb. 275 (1992) (earlier application of substantial-completion accrual rule for defective workmanship)
Witherspoon v. Sides Constr. Co., 219 Neb. 117 (1985) (limitations runs from substantial completion where general contractor/homebuilder is defendant)
Durre v. Wilkinson Development, 285 Neb. 880 (2013) (discusses application of § 25-223 to construction-defect claims)