Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 541.051 (2026)

Limitation Of Action For Damages Based On Services Or Construction To Improve Real Property

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Subdivision 1.Limitation; service or construction of real property; improvements.

(a) Except where fraud is involved, no action by any person in contract, tort, or otherwise to recover damages for any injury to property, real or personal, or for bodily injury or wrongful death, arising out of the defective and unsafe condition of an improvement to real property, shall be brought against any person performing or furnishing the design, planning, supervision, materials, or observation of construction or construction of the improvement to real property or against the owner of the real property more than two years after the cause of action accrues, as specified in paragraph (c), nor in any event shall such a cause of action accrue more than ten years after substantial completion of the construction. Date of substantial completion shall be determined by the date when construction is sufficiently completed so that the owner or the owner's representative can occupy or use the improvement for the intended purpose.

(b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a), an action for contribution or indemnity arising out of the defective and unsafe condition of an improvement to real property may be brought no later than two years after the cause of action for contribution or indemnity has accrued, regardless of whether it accrued before or after the ten-year period referenced in paragraph (a), provided that in no event may an action for contribution or indemnity be brought more than 14 years after substantial completion of the construction.

(c) For purposes of determining only when the statute of limitations begins to run pursuant to paragraph (a), a cause of action accrues: (1) for a bodily injury or wrongful death action, upon discovery of the injury; and (2) for an action for injury to real or personal property, upon discovery of the injury, but in no event does a cause of action accrue earlier than substantial completion, termination, or abandonment of the construction or the improvement to real property. For purposes of paragraph (b), a cause of action for contribution or indemnity accrues upon the earlier of commencement of the action against the party seeking contribution or indemnity, or payment of a final judgment, arbitration award, or settlement arising out of the defective and unsafe condition.

(d) Nothing in this section shall apply to actions for damages resulting from negligence in the maintenance, operation or inspection of the real property improvement against the owner or other person in possession.

(e) The limitations prescribed in this section do not apply to the manufacturer or supplier of any equipment or machinery installed upon real property.

Subd. 2.Action allowed; limitation.

Notwithstanding the provisions of subdivision 1, paragraph (a), in the case of a cause of action described in subdivision 1, paragraph (a), which accrues during the ninth or tenth year after substantial completion of the construction, an action to recover damages may be brought within two years after the date on which the cause of action accrued, but in no event may such an action be brought more than 12 years after substantial completion of the construction. Nothing in this subdivision shall limit the time for bringing an action for contribution or indemnity.

Subd. 3.Not construed.

Nothing in this section shall be construed as extending the period prescribed by the laws of this state for the bringing of any action.

Subd. 4.Applicability.

For the purposes of actions based on breach of the statutory warranties set forth in section 327A.02, or to actions based on breach of an express written warranty, such actions shall be brought within two years of the discovery of the breach. In the case of an action under section 327A.05, which accrues during the ninth or tenth year after the warranty date, as defined in section 327A.01, subdivision 8, an action may be brought within two years of the discovery of the breach, but in no event may an action under section 327A.05 be brought more than 12 years after the effective warranty date. An action for contribution or indemnity arising out of actions described in this subdivision may be brought no later than two years after the earlier of commencement of the action against the party seeking contribution or indemnity, or payment of a final judgment, arbitration award, or settlement arising out of the breach, provided that in no event may an action for contribution or indemnity arising out of an action described in section 327A.05 be brought more than 14 years after the effective warranty date.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 183 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1971–2025 · leading case: Lietz v. N. States Power Co., 718 N.W.2d 865 (Minn. 2006).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Lietz v. N. States Power Co., 718 N.W.2d 865 (Minn. 2006). · cites it 190× “The district court granted respondents' motions for summary judgment based on the two-year statute of limitations found in Minn.Stat. § 541.051, subd. 1(a) (2004). The court of appeals, in a split decision, affirmed the district court.”

Weston v. McWilliams & Assocs., Inc., 716 N.W.2d 634 (Minn. 2006). · cites it 108× “Minn.Stat. § 541.051, subd. 1(a) (2002). Respondent McWilliams & Associates, Inc.”

Olmanson v. LeSueur Cnty., 693 N.W.2d 876 (Minn. 2005). · cites it 86× “In this case we are asked to decide whether the 10-year statute of repose provision in Minn.Stat. § 541.051, subd. 1(a) (2004), applies to claims for negligence based on a landowner's common-law duty to inspect and maintain the property.”

Day Masonry v. Indep. Sch. Dist. 347, 781 N.W.2d 321 (Minn. 2010). · cites it 64× “Day Masonry, joined by the other contractors, argued that Minn.Stat. § 541.051 (2006) barred all the School District’s claims— both the express warranty claims and the non-warranty claims — and moved for summary judgment on the grounds that these claims were time-barred.”

In re Individual 35W Bridge Litig., 806 N.W.2d 811 (Minn. 2011). · cites it 92× “Jacobs moved to dismiss the lawsuits as time-barred, and argued that the 2007 amendments to Minn.Stat. § 541.051 (2010) did not revive actions for contribution or indemnity that had been previously extinguished by a prior version of the statute of repose.”

Calder v. City of Crystal, 318 N.W.2d 838 (Minn. 1982). · cites it 56× “This motion was based on the ground that the City of Crystal’s cause of action against Sehoell for contribution or indemnification was barred by Minn.Stat. § 541.051 (1980). Only the City of Crystal and Sehoell are parties to this appeal; the other third-party defendants, Hipp…”

State Farm Fire & Cas. v. Aquila Inc., 718 N.W.2d 879 (Minn. 2006). · cites it 44× “” Following discovery, Aquila and Northern Pipeline filed motions for summary judgment, arguing that respondents’ claims were barred by Minn.Stat. § 541.051, which imposes a 10-year repose period on all causes of actions “arising out of the defective and unsafe condition of an…”

Vlahos v. R&I Constr. of Bloomington, Inc., 676 N.W.2d 672 (Minn. 2004). · cites it 33× “The district court granted summary judgment in favor of R&I and the third-party defendants, concluding that the 2-year statute of limitations for claims arising from improvements to real property, Minn. Stat. § 541.051 , subd. 1(a) (2002), barred the suit because the Rovicks…”

Lovgren v. Peoples Elec. Co., Inc., 380 N.W.2d 791 (Minn. 1986). · cites it 56× “Minn.Stat. § 541.051 (1976). In Pacific Indemnity Co.”

Johnson v. Steele-Waseca Coop. Elec., 469 N.W.2d 517 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 71× “, claim summary judgment was erroneously based on Minn.Stat. § 541.051, the statute of limitations for causes of action arising out of improvements to real property.”

Sartori v. Harnischfeger Corp., 432 N.W.2d 448 (Minn. 1988). · cites it 31× “Whether the equipment at issue in these cases constitutes an “improvement to real property” within the meaning of Minn. Stat. § 541.051 (1980); and 2. Whether application to these cases of the 15-year statute of limitations set forth in Minn.”

Great N. Ins. Co. v. Honeywell Int'l, Inc., 911 N.W.2d 510 (Minn. 2018). · cites it 36× “" See Minn. Stat. § 541.051 , subd. 1 (a), (e) (2016).”

Show all 183 citing cases →

— Minn. Stat. § 541.051(1) — 3 cases

New Riegel Local Sch. Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Buehrer Grp. Architecture & Eng., Inc. (Slip Opinion), 2019 Ohio 2851 (Ohio 2019).

Juster Steel v. Carlson Companies, 366 N.W.2d 616 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985).

Am. Home Assurance Co. v. Major Tool & Mach., Inc., 767 F.2d 446 (8th Cir. 1985).

— Minn. Stat. § 541.051(1)(a) — 1 case

Concordia Coll. Corp. v. W.R. Grace & Co., 999 F.2d 326 (8th Cir. 1993).

— Minn. Stat. § 541.051(l)(d) — 1 case

Contech Engineered Solutions LLC v. Element Materials Tech. St. Paul Inc., 141 F. Supp. 3d 945 (D. Minnesota 2015).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.