Opinion ID: 2533998
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: HLFPD's real estate-related claims accrued on the effective date of the leases.

Text: The district court stated that HLFPD's allegations ... contend that these contracts were a violation of the statutory terms of the contracts between the SIF and its policyholders ab initio.  The district court also noted that the Insurance Code provides that the eligibility of an investment is to be determined as of the date of its making or acquisition. Thus, since HLFPD's claims challenged the eligibility of the SIF's investments, the district court held that HLFPD's real estate-related claims accrued at the moment the SIF and the State entered into the agreements. The district court's holding is proper. HLFPD's argument for a project completion rule fails. C & G v. Canyon Highway Dist. No. 4, 139 Idaho 140, 75 P.3d 194 (2003) was an inverse condemnation case. This Court was persuaded that, the nature of the government's wrongdoing, a continuing construction project, required a different standard for determining when the notice period was triggered. Id. at 143, 75 P.3d at 197. The case at hand does not involve a continuing invasion of property rights. HLFPD's real estate claims are time-barred. The district court's holding is affirmed.