Cited by

Co., (recognizing that “negligent construction of a residence may give rise to an action for breach of the implied warranty of workmanlike performance and habitability and an action for breach of the contractor’s common law duty of care”).

at 545 ¶ 11 (quoting Lofts, 218 Ariz. at 575 ¶ 5); (explaining “the implied warranty .

Co., but cannot be filed later than eight years after construction is completed per our statute of repose, A.R.S.

Co., (citing Cosmopolitan Homes, (Colo.

declared 7 TEUFEL V. AMERICAN FAMILY/HANSON Opinion of the Court otherwise.

“The defense of the statute of limitations is not favored by the courts, and where two constructions are possible, the longer period of limitations is preferred.” Woodward v. Chirco Const. Co., Inc., approved as supplemented

¶10 Woodward v. Chirco Construction Co., Inc., directs our decision.

of a residence.” Woodward v. Chirco Const. Co., Inc., (emphasis added).

Co., (noting that law imputes warranty into construction contract and allows subsequent purchasers a cause of action).

Co., *169 Inc., -16 , -71 (1984) (rejecting argument that because implied warranty of habitability and workmanlike performance “is imposed by law,” it does not arise out of contract).

Co., , (six-year limitations period applies to claim for breach of “implied warranty of workmanlike performance” in a home construction contract); cf. The Lofts at Fillmore Condominium Ass’n v. Reliance Comm.

P.2d 1269 (1984) — a case decided a few months before Salt River.

Corp., , (barring strict liability action in products liability context when only economic loss occurs), abrogated on other grounds by Phelps v. Firebird Raceway, Inc., , Woodward v. Chino Const. Co., Inc., , (barring negligence claim for pure economic losses in construction defect context); Carstens, , , (same); Nastri v. Wood Bros. Homes, Inc., , (sa

Co., , (emphasis added).

Co., Inc., , (holding that claims for breach of implied warranty arise out of contract); , (awarding reasonable attorneys’ fees to the defendant under A.R.S.

Co., , (a home purchaser can bring a contract claim for the cost of repairing defects, but can bring a tort claim only for injuries to person or personal property).

Richards, however, involved an implied warranty of workmanship and habitability in the construction of dwellings, , to sound only in contract.

See also Woodward v. Chirco Construction Co., Inc., , modified on other grounds, , (only a contractor is competent to testify as an expert witness on the standard of care among contractors).

Co., , we applied the six-year statute of limitations to an action based on the implied warranty of workmanlike performance and habitability because the cause of action ultimately was based on the contract between the two parties.