BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home Anaheim California production housing Anaheim California concrete tilt-up Anaheim California multi family housing Anaheim California housing Anaheim California mid-rise construction Anaheim California landscaping construction Anaheim California Medical building Anaheim California custom homes Anaheim California structural steel construction Anaheim California hospital construction Anaheim California condominiums Anaheim California office building Anaheim California Subterranean parking Anaheim California institutional building Anaheim California industrial building Anaheim California casino resort Anaheim California parking structure Anaheim California high-rise construction Anaheim California townhome construction Anaheim California low-income housing Anaheim California condominium Anaheim California
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Anaheim, California

    California Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: SB800 (codified as Civil Code §§895, et seq) is the most far-reaching, complex law regulating construction defect litigation, right to repair, warranty obligations and maintenance requirements transference in the country. In essence, to afford protection against frivolous lawsuits, builders shall do all the following:A homeowner is obligated to follow all reasonable maintenance obligations and schedules communicated in writing to the homeowner by the builder and product manufacturers, as well as commonly accepted maintenance practices. A failure by a homeowner to follow these obligations, schedules, and practices may subject the homeowner to the affirmative defenses.A builder, under the principles of comparative fault pertaining to affirmative defenses, may be excused, in whole or in part, from any obligation, damage, loss, or liability if the builder can demonstrate any of the following affirmative defenses in response to a claimed violation:


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Anaheim California

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Building Industry Association Southern California - Desert Chapter
    Local # 0532
    77570 Springfield Ln Ste E
    Palm Desert, CA 92211
    http://www.desertchapter.com

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Riverside County Chapter
    Local # 0532
    3891 11th St Ste 312
    Riverside, CA 92501


    Building Industry Association Southern California
    Local # 0532
    17744 Sky Park Circle Suite 170
    Irvine, CA 92614
    http://www.biasc.org

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Orange County Chapter
    Local # 0532
    17744 Skypark Cir Ste 170
    Irvine, CA 92614
    http://www.biaoc.com

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Baldy View Chapter
    Local # 0532
    8711 Monroe Ct Ste B
    Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
    http://www.biabuild.com

    Building Industry Association Southern California - LA/Ventura Chapter
    Local # 0532
    28460 Ave Stanford Ste 240
    Santa Clarita, CA 91355


    Building Industry Association Southern California - Building Industry Association of S Ca Antelope Valley
    Local # 0532
    44404 16th St W Suite 107
    Lancaster, CA 93535



    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Anaheim California

    Insurer Settles on Construction Defect Claim

    Repair of Part May Necessitate Replacement of Whole

    Condo Board May Be Negligent for not Filing Construction Defect Suit in a Timely Fashion

    Former Zurich Executive to Head Willis North America Construction Insurance Group

    In Oregon Construction Defect Claims, “Contract Is (Still) King”

    Failure to Meet Code Case Remanded to Lower Court for Attorney Fees

    Boston’s Tunnel Project Plagued by Water

    Remodels Replace Construction in Redding

    Late Filing Contractor Barred from Involving Subcontractors in Construction Defect Claim

    Construction Defect Lawsuit Stayed by SB800

    Orange County Home Builder Dead at 93

    BUILD Act Inching Closer To Reality

    Discovery Ordered in Nevada Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Save A Legal Fee? Sometimes You Better Talk With Your Construction Attorney

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Construction Defect Claims

    Construction Defects as Occurrences, Better Decided in Law than in Courts

    Michigan Supreme Court Concludes No Statute of Repose on Breach of Contract

    When is a Construction Project truly “Complete”? That depends. (law note)

    Claims Under Colorado Defect Action Reform Act Count as Suits

    Can We Compel Insurers To Cover Construction Defect in General Liability Policies?

    Pictorial Construction Terminology Dictionary — A Quick and Helpful Reference

    Public Relations Battle over Harmon Tower

    Harmon Hotel Construction Defect Update

    Minnesota Starts Wide-Ranging Registration of Contractors

    “Details Matter” is the Foundation in a Texas Construction Defect Suit

    Washington Supreme Court Sides with Lien Claimants in Williams v. Athletic Field

    Reference to "Man Made" Movement of Earth Corrects Ambiguity

    Statutes of Limitations May be the Colorado Contractors’ Friend

    Background Owner of Property Cannot Be Compelled to Arbitrate Construction Defects

    Exclusion Bars Coverage for Mold, Fungus

    District Court’s Ruling Affirmed in TCD v American Family Mutual Insurance Co.

    Insurer’s Discovery Requests Ruled to be Overbroad in Construction Defect Suit

    Court Sends Construction Defect Case from Kansas to Missouri

    Preparing For the Worst with Smart Books & Records

    The Flood Insurance Reform Act May be Extended to 2016

    Negligent Misrepresentation in Sale of Building Altered without Permits

    Texas exclusions j(5) and j(6).

    Construction Case Alert: Appellate Court Confirms Engineer’s Duty to Defend Developer Arises Upon Tender of Indemnity Claim

    Insurer Unable to Declare its Coverage Excess In Construction Defect Case

    More Charges in Las Vegas HOA Scandal

    Plaintiffs In Construction Defect Cases to Recover For Emotional Damages?

    Court Clarifies Sequence in California’s SB800

    MGM Seeks to Demolish Harmon Towers

    New Safety Standards Issued by ASSE and ANSI

    Unlicensed Contractors Nabbed in Sting Operation

    Read Her Lips: “No New Buildings”

    Houses Can Still Make Cents: Illinois’ Implied Warranty of Habitability

    Construction Firm Sues City and Engineers over Reservoir Project

    Rihanna Finds Construction Defects Hit a Sour Note

    Lawsuit over Construction Defects Not a Federal Case

    Preparing for Trial on a Cause of Action for Violation of Civil Code section 895, et seq.

    Geometrically Defined Drainage Cavities in EIFS as a Guard Against Defects

    SB800 Cases Approach the Courts

    Brown Paint Doesn’t Cover Up Construction Defects

    Home Sales Still Low, But Enough to Spur Homebuilders

    No Coverage Under Ensuing Loss Provision

    CC&Rs Not the Place for Arbitration Agreement, Court Rules

    Colorado “occurrence”

    Vegas Hi-Rise Not Earthquake Safe

    Important Information Regarding Colorado Mechanic’s Lien Rights.

    Virginia Chinese Drywall “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and number of “occurrences”

    Eighth Circuit Remands to Determine Applicability of Collapse Exclusion

    Georgia Law: “An Occurrence Can Arise Where Faulty Workmanship Causes Unforeseen or Unexpected Damage to Other Property”

    Texas contractual liability exclusion

    Construction Defects and Contractor-Owners

    Instant Hotel Tower, But Is It Safe?

    Certificate of Merit to Sue Architects or Engineers Bill Proposed

    Faulty Workmanship Exclusion Does Not Bar Coverage

    Webinar on Insurance Disputes in Construction Defects

    Toxic Drywall Not Covered Under Homeowner’s Policy

    Architect Not Responsible for Injuries to Guests

    Loss Caused by Seepage of Water Not Covered

    Hovnanian Increases Construction Defect Reserves for 2012

    Court Requires Adherence to “Good Faith and Fair Dealing” in Construction Defect Coverage

    In Colorado, Repair Vendors Can Bring First-Party Bad Faith Actions For Amounts Owed From an Insurer

    Australian Group Seeks Stronger Codes to Combat Dangerous Defects

    Federal District Court Predicts Florida Will Adopt Injury In Fact Trigger

    Ensuing Loss Found Ambiguous, Allowing Coverage

    Application of Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine Supports Coverage

    Seller Cannot Compel Arbitration for Its Role in Construction Defect Case<

    $5 Million Construction Defect Lawsuit over Oregon Townhomes

    Ohio Adopts Energy-Efficient Building Code

    Texas res judicata and co-insurer defense costs contribution

    JDi Data Introduces Mobile App for Litigation Cost Allocation

    Contractor Burns Down Home, Insurer Refuses Coverage

    Construction Defect Exception Does Not Lift Bar in Payment Dispute

    Exclusions Bar Coverage for Damage Caused by Chinese Drywall

    Texas covered versus uncovered allocation and “legally obligated to pay.”

    Supreme Court of Oregon Affirms Decision in Abraham v. T. Henry Construction, et al.

    Texas Law Bars Coverage under Homeowner’s Policy for Mold Damage
    Corporate Profile

    ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Anaheim, California Construction Expert Witness Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 5,500 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Anaheim's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, as well as a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Anaheim California forensic architect eifs expert witnessAnaheim California forensic architect structural concrete expertAnaheim California forensic architect structural engineering expert witnessesAnaheim California forensic architect OSHA expert witness constructionAnaheim California forensic architect forensic architectAnaheim California forensic architect building code expert witnessAnaheim California forensic architect construction expert testimony
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    Contractor Underpaid Workers, Pocketed the Difference

    February 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Property Casualty 360 reports that the owner of a construction company in California’s Bay Area has been arraigned in San Francisco Superior Court. The fifty-seven felony counts include charges of payroll theft and insurance fraud.

    San Francisco District Attorney, George Gascon is quoted as saying that Doherty’s actions “hurts the honest businesses that were unable to successfully compete for these projects which the defendant was able to underbid and win as a result of this scheme.”

    Frances Ann Doherty, owner of Doherty Painting & Construction has been charged with submitting false documentation as to what wages she paid her workers. It is alleged that over three years she pocketed $600,000. Additionally, she is charged with underpaying her insurer by more than $100,000 by submitting to them the fake payroll information.

    Read the full story…


    Judge Concludes Drywall Manufacturer Sold in Florida

    September 13, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    A Florida judge has concluded that the Chinese drywall manufacturer Taishan actively sought to sell its products in Florida and cannot now claim that it was not involved. Judge Joseph Farnia also noted that the main distributor of the drywall was, as noted in the Miami Herald, an arm of the company. Lennar Hones has sued the firm after installing drywall manufactured by the company in hundreds of homes.

    Taishan’s activities in Florida included not only distributing samples, but also hosting tours of their plants in China for construction executives, and even making customized runs. According to other reports, has lost past cases over defects in their drywall.

    Read the full story…


    New Households Moving to Apartments

    December 20, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The New York Times reports that multifamily construction?Äîapartment buildings?Äîis leading the recovery in construction. Construction of single-family homes is only a third of the way up from its fall from its earlier heights, while multifamily construction has recovered two-thirds of its peak. Young adults are moving out of their parents’ homes, but instead of buying homes, they’re renting apartments.

    Houston is adding thousands of new units, leading to a fear of overbuilding. Rents have been rising, but as the supply of apartment units rises, higher rents may be unsustainable. However, during the recession, young adults did not move out of their parents’ homes, leading to about two million doubled-up households. David Crowe, the chief economist of the National Association of Home Builders, noted that “all of the net addition to households since 2004 has been in rentals.”

    Read the full story…


    South Carolina Legislature Defines "Occurrence" To Include Property Damage Arising From Faulty Workmanship

    May 26, 2011 — Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    On May 17, 2011, South Carolina passed legislation to combat the restrictive interpretation of what constitutes an "occurrence" under CGL policies. S.C. Code Ann. sec. 38-61-70.

    The legislation reversed a decision by the state's Supreme Court issued earlier this year. See Crossman Communities of North Carolina, Inc. v. Harleysville Mut. Ins. Co., 2011 W.L. 93716 (S.C. Jan. 7, 2011). Crossman had overruled an earlier decision by the South Carolina Supreme Court that holding that defective construction was an “occurrence.” Crossman, however, reversed course, holding that damages resulting from faulty workmanship were the “natural and probable cause” of the faulty work and, as such, did not qualify as an “occurrence.”

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com


    OSHA Extends Delay of Residential Construction Fall Protection Requirements

    September 13, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    OSHA has announced a fourth delay in full implementation of requiring fall protection in residential construction. The requirements, which would obligate those in residential construction to use the same degree of fall protection as is used in commercial construction, were originally set to go into effect in September 2011. As part of the phasing in of the new requirements, penalties were reduced, originally until March 2012. This has now been extended until December 15, 2012.

    Read the full story…


    Water Damage Covered Under Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    August 2, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    A U.S. District Court in Washington found coverage in what it described as a text book study of the efficient proximate cause rule. Hiller v. Allstate Pro. & Cas. Ins. Co., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84862 (E.D. Wash. June 19, 2012).

    The Hillers purchased a newly constructed home in December 2006. They also purchased an all-risk homeowner's policy from Allstate.

    In July 2010, the Hillers discovered that the carpet in the basement of the residence was saturated with water. Allstate was immediately notified. Hiller began an investigation to attempt to determine the source of the water. He poured water into a downspout drain at the northwest corner of the residence. This caused water to leak into the northwest corner of the home's basement.

    An area was excavated around the northwest downspout drain. The end of the drain pipe was partially blocked by rocks and had been wrapped with fabric landscaping material. Further, a “T” pipe installed at the foot of the drain was directing water toward the house's concrete foundation. Hiller notified Allstate that the problems with the drain was due to construction defects and the system was designed to fail.

    Allstate denied the claim. Based upon Hiller's information, coverage was excluded under the policy's surface water, subsurface water, inherent vice, and latent defect exclusions.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com


    Contractor Removed from Site for Lack of Insurance

    October 28, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The MetroWest Daily News reports that a demolition firm was told to leave the construction site at Natick High School since their failure to have workers compensation insurance makes them unable to work on the project. The contractor, Atlantic Dismantling and Site Construction, Inc. may have been working illegally since September.

    The equipment that Atlantic had rented for the job was repossessed in August. Brait Builders Corp, the general contractor for the site had rented equipment so Atlantic could continue their work.

    Their lack of insurance was discovered when a worker had a minor job-related injury. The state had issued a stop-work order for the firm and they could not legally bid on public projects. The school system did not receive any notice of this, and the school’s facilities director said of the general contractor, “chances are Brait never heard of anything either.”

    Read the full story...


    Construction Firm Charged for Creating “Hail” Damage

    June 19, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    A Burlington County, Pennsylvania judge has sentenced a firm and its employee for insurance fraud. In the scam, representatives of Precision Builders visited homes after hailstorms and advised homeowners that they could get new roofs and sidings covered by insurance. Many of the homeowners noted that they had not noticed any hail damage.

    After homeowners filed claims, employees of Precision Builders would visit the homes and damage the roofs and sidings consistent with the adjusters’ reports.

    One employee of Precision Builders, Dominik Sadowski, has pleaded guilty to third-degree insurance fraud. He has been sentenced to four years probation and 100 hours of community service. Another defendant, Marcin Gradziel, is alleged to have visited and damaged properties. He has plead not guilty.

    Read the full story…


    Nevada Assembly Sends Construction Defect Bill to Senate

    June 6, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    In a 26 to 16 vote, the Nevada Assembly has passed Assembly Bill 401, which extends the time limit for legal action over home construction defects. According to the Las Vegas Sun, Assembly member Marcus Conklin, Democrat of Las Vegas, said the bill was about “keeping the consumer whole.” However, Ira Hansen, Republican of Sparks, told the sun that suits are happening before contractors can make repairs. The bill would allow attorney fees even if repairs are made.

    Read the full story…


    Insurance Policy Provides No Coverage For Slab Collapse in Vision One

    August 17, 2011 — Douglas Reiser, Builders Counsel

    This post will examine whether Division Two of the Washington Court of Appeals properly reversed and remanded several lower court decisions in the case of Vision One LLC v. Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance. In short, and from the perspective of an appellate attorney, the court of appeals got the decision right. Given the rules of contract interpretation and causation in tort claims, there was really no other way the court could have ruled. I understand that from a contractor’s perspective and insurance perspective, the decision seems odd. But from a purely legal standpoint, the decision is well-reasoned and well-supported. Let me explain.

    Background

    First, here are the facts in a nutshell. Vision One is a construction company that undertook to construct a condo complex in Tacoma. Vision then contracted with D&D Concrete to pour a concrete slab for a section of the foundation. To shore the concrete slab, D&D further contracted Berg Equipment to provide necessary equipment to stabilize the structure. Well, something down the line went wrong. The shoring failed and the slab collapsed, causing a great deal of damage.

    Read the full story…

    Read the court’s decision…

    Reprinted courtesy of Douglas Reiser of Reiser Legal LLC. Mr. Reiser can be contacted at info@reiserlegal.com


    Construction Case Alert: Appellate Court Confirms Engineer’s Duty to Defend Developer Arises Upon Tender of Indemnity Claim

    January 27, 2010 — By Steven M. Cvitanovic, Haight Brown & Bonesteel, LLP, January 27, 2010

    In the recent case of UDC-Universal Development, L.P. v. CH2M Hill, 2010 Cal.App.LEXIS 47 (filed January 15, 2010), the Sixth District Court of Appeal provided a stunning illustration of the far-reaching effects of the California Supreme Court’s holding in Crawford v. Weather Shield Manufacturing Inc. (2008) 44 Cal.4th 541. In Crawford, the Court held the duty to defend under an indemnity agreement arose upon the mere tender of defense of a claim covered by the indemnity.

    In the UDC case, CH2M Hill provided engineering and environmental planning services to developer UDC on a project that ultimately wound up in a construction defect lawsuit by the homeowners association ( HOA ). UDC tendered its defense to CH2M Hill, the tender was rejected, and UDC filed a cross-complaint for negligence, breach of contract and indemnity against CH2M Hill and others. After the HOA’s construction defect claims were settled, UDC proceeded to trial against CH2M Hill. The jury found in favor of CH2M Hill on the claims for negligence and breach of contract. At the request of the parties prior to trial, the trial court ruled on the application of the indemnity agreement in light of Crawford and, in so doing, found that the defense obligation arose upon the tender and that CH2M Hill breached that duty despite the jury finding in favor of CH2M Hill.

    The Court of Appeal affirmed, noting that the defense obligation arose as soon as the defense was tendered and did not depend on the outcome of the litigation, and that the HOA’s general description of the defects along with an allegation that Doe engineers were negligent triggered the duty to defend.

    Although this case did not expand the crushing impact of Crawford’s holding, it is

    Read the full story...


    Micropiles for bad soil: a Tarheel victory

    March 14, 2011 — Original article by by Melissa Brumback on March 14, 2011

    Despite foundation challenges, construction is almost complete on the expansion at University of North Carolina’s Kenan stadium. The project started with a deep foundation system from design-build contractor GeoStructures. Known as the Carolina Student-Athlete Center for Excellence, the addition was built on a parcel with a knotty mix of fill soils, subsurface boulders and varying depths to rock. To achieve uniform foundation support, GeoStructures designed a Micropile system (also known as a Mini pile system) which could be drilled into the variable ground conditions.

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Brumback of Ragsdale Liggett PLLC. Ms. Brumback can be contacted at mbrumback@rl law.com.


    Mortar Insufficient to Insure Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Case

    January 6, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The US District Court of Nevada issued a summary judgment in the case of R&O Construction Company V. Rox Pro International Group, Ltd. on December 19, 2011. The case involved the installation of stone veneer at a Home Depot location (Home Depot was not involved in the case). R&O’s subcontractor, New Creation Masonry, purchased the stone veneer from Arizona Stone. Judge Larry Hicks noted that “the stone veneer failed and R&O was forced to make substantial structural repairs to the Home Depot store.”

    Rox Pro asked the court for a summary judgment, which the court granted only in part. The court looked at two issues in the case, whether the installation instructions constituted a breach of implied warranty of merchantability, and whether there was a breach of an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.

    Judge Hicks found that there was a breach of implied warranty of merchantability. The instructions drafted by Real Stone and distributed by Arizona Stone were not sufficient for affixing the supplied stones, according to R&O’s expert, a claim the plaintiffs dispute. “Because there is an issue of material fact concerning the installation guidelines, the court shall deny Arizona Stone’s motion for a summary judgment on this issue.”

    On the other hand, the judge did not find that the instructions had any bearing as to whether R&O bought the stone, since the stone was selected by the shopping center developer. This issue was, in the view of the judge, appropriately dismissed.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Public Relations Battle over Harmon Tower

    October 23, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Tutor Pernini claims that CityCenter is portraying the construction firm as “the scum of the earth” in an attempt to influence eventual jurors, according to an article at Vegas Inc. The contractor’s attorneys have requested information regarding the public relations efforts of MGM Resorts and CityCenter, characterizing CityCenter’s PR as a “litigation spin doctor.”

    CityCenter has requested that at least one subpoena be canceled. Judge Elizabeth Gonzales has already allowed one to go through, although she has noted that Perini cannot request documents from CityCenter’s lawyers to the litigation consultants under attorney/client privilege. Tutor Perini claims that in 2010, Patricia Glaser, who has represented CityCenter, said her goal was to portray Perini as “the scum of the earth,” and make that certain that judges and juries would not “adopt the world view espoused by the opposing party.”

    Read the full story…


    Las Vegas Home Builder Still in Bankruptcy

    October 23, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    American West Development attempted to exit Chapter 11 bankruptcy on September 27, but their plan was turned down by U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Mike Nakagawa. According to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, Judge Nakagawa rejected the plan over a trust fund for construction defects. America West’s attorney said they were hoping to complete the process by the end of the year.

    Under approved portions of the plan, America West’s owner, Lawrence Canarelli, will retain control of the corporation, although he must contribute $10 million into the firm and an additional $1.5 million into the fund for construction defects. America West faces charges for construction defects reported in the broad range of “less than $20 million” to “as much as $80 million.”

    Read the full story…


    Construction Upturn in Silicon Valley

    August 17, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Work resumed after nearly three years on an office tower in Santa Clara, according to the San Jose Mercury News. Work had stalled on the building due to the economy, but now the developer is planning a second five-story building on the site. Other dormant projects in the area are also getting restarted. Santa Clara County saw the addition of 1,800 construction jobs in June.

    A spokesperson for the Operating Engineers Local 3 in Alameda told the paper, “two years ago we had five thousand folks on the out-of-work list. It’s now down to about 1,700.”

    Read the full story…


    Discovery Ordered in Nevada Construction Defect Lawsuit

    August 16, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Gemstone LVS was sued by the Manhattan Homeowners Association in Las Vegas, after which Chartis Specialty Insurance informed Gemstone that they “had no duty to defend or indemnify Gemstone under the Commercial Umbrella Liability Policy.” Gemstone “asserts that at the time the Policy was purchased, it was understood that Chartis would provide insurance coverage for a construction defect lawsuit” and now seeks discovery “to prove Chartis’ bad faith purpose in drafting an illusory Policy.”

    The opinion notes that “the Court conducted a preliminary peek at the pending motion for partial summary judgment and finds that Chartis has not made the strong showing necessary to support the requested stay.” Further, the court notes that “when ambiguity in the language of a policy exists, the court may consider not only the language of the policy but also the ‘intent of the parties, the subject matter of the policy, and the circumstances surrounding its issuance.’” The court concludes that “this type of discovery is relevant to understanding the intent of the parties, more specifically, whether it was understood that Chartis would provide insurance coverage given the construction defect lawsuit.”

    Accordingly, the court denied Chartis’ motion for stay of discovery and established a schedule for discovery, expert designations, rebuttal expert designations, and other matters related to the trial.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Texas res judicata and co-insurer defense costs contribution

    March 23, 2011 — Original story by CDCoverage.com, March 23, 2011

    In Truck Ins. Exchange v. Mid-Continent Casualty Co., No. 03-08-00526-CV (Tex. App. 3d Aug. 27, 2010), insured contractor DCI was sued by the project owner seeking damages for defective construction. DCI tendered its defense to its CGL insurers Truck and Mid-Continent. Truck agreed to defend while Mid-Continent denied a defense. While the underlying suit was pending, Mid-Continent sued DCI, but not Truck, and obtained a judicial declaration of no duty to defend or indemnify DCI in the underlying suit. After settling the underlying suit, Truck sued Mid-Continent seeking contribution towards defense costs and indemnity payments. The state trial court entered summary judgment for Mid-Continent. The intermediate appellate court affirmed.

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com