Thompson Thrift Contruction, Inc. v. Modus Studio, Pllc
2025 Ark. App. 193
Ark. Ct. App.2025Background
- West Center Partners sued Thompson Thrift Construction (Thompson) for alleged construction defects at a student housing project, with Thompson filing third-party complaints against various subcontractors and the project architect, Modus Studio, alleging contractual and tort-based claims.
- The date of substantial completion of the project was August 14, 2014; Thompson's third-party complaint was filed exactly five years later, within the statute of repose under Ark. Code Ann. § 16-56-112.
- The original lawsuit was nonsuited in favor of arbitration, resulting in the dismissal without prejudice of all third-party complaints, including Thompson’s claims against Modus.
- Thompson refiled its claims against Modus within one year of that dismissal (invoking Arkansas’s savings statute), but this was now more than five years after project completion.
- The circuit court ruled that the statute of repose in § 16-56-112 barred Thompson’s refiled claims, finding the savings statute did not apply to revive claims outside the repose period, and dismissed the claims against Modus with prejudice.
- On immediate appeal, the Arkansas Court of Appeals reversed, holding the savings statute applies to claims dismissed after being timely filed within the statute of repose, permitting refiling within one year even if the repose period has ended.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the 5-year statute of repose on construction claims bar refiling under the 1-year savings statute after a nonsuit? | Timely filed under repose statute, so can refile within 1 year under savings statute even if repose has expired. | Statute of repose is absolute and extinguishes right to sue; savings statute does not apply to repose periods. | Savings statute applies; timely-filed claims may be refiled within one year after nonsuit, even if repose period has run. |
Key Cases Cited
- State Bank v. Magness, 11 Ark. 343 (1850) (explains savings statute's application to voluntary and involuntary dismissals)
- Summerville v. Thrower, 369 Ark. 231 (2007) (distinguishes between statutes of repose and statutes of limitation)
- Carter v. Hartenstein, 248 Ark. 1172 (1970) (characterization of statute of repose as a limitation)
- In re Adoption of Martindale, 327 Ark. 685 (1997) (savings statute inapplicable to certain statutory special proceedings)
- Ray & Sons Masonry Contractors, Inc. v. U.S. Fid. & Guar. Co., 353 Ark. 201 (2003) (discusses scope of § 16-56-112)