BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing Anaheim California multi family housing Anaheim California townhome construction Anaheim California office building Anaheim California low-income housing Anaheim California industrial building Anaheim California condominiums Anaheim California institutional building Anaheim California concrete tilt-up Anaheim California retail construction Anaheim California casino resort Anaheim California landscaping construction Anaheim California parking structure Anaheim California Subterranean parking Anaheim California mid-rise construction Anaheim California custom homes Anaheim California housing Anaheim California structural steel construction Anaheim California custom home Anaheim California tract home Anaheim California high-rise construction Anaheim California hospital construction 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

    Nevada Senate Rejects Construction Defect Bill

    Ohio “property damage” caused by an “occurrence.”

    Insurer Able to Refuse Coverage for Failed Retaining Wall

    Construction Defect Notice in the Mailbox? Respond Appropriately

    The Complete and Accepted Work Doctrine and Construction Defects

    Alaska Supreme Court Dismisses Claims of Uncooperative Pro Se Litigant in Defect Case

    Tucson Officials to Discuss Construction Defect Claim

    Defective Drains Covered Despite Water Intrusion Exclusion

    HOA Has No Claim to Extend Statute of Limitations in Construction Defect Case

    Plaintiff Not Entitled to Further Damages over Defective Decking

    Another Guilty Plea in Las Vegas HOA Scandal

    Park District Sues over Leaky Roof

    California Bill Would Notify Homeowners on Construction Defect Options

    Contractor Sues License Board

    Arbitration Clause Found Ambiguous in Construction Defect Case

    Good and Bad News on Construction Employment

    Utah Construction Defect Claims Dependant on Contracts

    Environment Decision May Expand Construction Defect Claims

    Court finds subcontractor responsible for defending claim

    Cleveland Condo Board Says Construction Defects Caused Leaks

    High School Gym Closed by Construction Defects

    Important Information Regarding Colorado Mechanic’s Lien Rights.

    David McLain to Speak at the CDLA 2012 Annual Conference

    Timing of Insured’s SIR Payment Has No Effect on Non-Participating Insurer’s Equitable Contribution to Co-Insurer

    Insurers Reacting to Massachusetts Tornadoes

    Injured Construction Worker Settles for Five Hundred Thousand

    Court Strikes Down Reasonable Construction Defect Settlement

    Homebuilding Still on the Rise

    Nevada Court Adopts Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    Insurance Firm Under No Duty to Defend in Hawaii Construction Defect Case

    Construction Defect Exception Does Not Lift Bar in Payment Dispute

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

    Harsh New Time Limits on Construction Defect Claims

    2011 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar – Recap

    New Households Moving to Apartments

    New Construction Laws, New Forms in California

    No Coverage For Damage Caused by Chinese Drywall

    Construction Defect Not a RICO Case, Says Court

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

    Home Sales Still Low, But Enough to Spur Homebuilders

    The Colorado Court of Appeals Rules that a Statutory Notice of Claim Triggers an Insurer’s Duty to Defend.

    Consulting Firm Indicted and Charged with Falsifying Concrete Reports

    Judge Rejects Extrapolation, Harmon Tower to Remain Standing

    Vegas Hi-Rise Not Earthquake Safe

    Damron Agreement Questioned in Colorado Casualty Insurance v Safety Control Company, et al.

    Condo Owners Worried Despite Settlement

    Parking Garage Collapse May Be Due to Construction Defect

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

    Contractor Sues Supplier over Defective Products

    Texas “your work” exclusion

    Repair of Part May Necessitate Replacement of Whole

    Colorado “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and exclusions j(5) and j(6) “that particular part”

    Home Repair Firms Sued for Fraud

    Remodels Replace Construction in Redding

    Residential Construction Down in San Diego

    Construction Defect Case Not Over, Despite Summary Judgment

    Construction Workers Unearth Bones

    Hospital Construction Firm Settles Defect Claim for $1.1 Million

    No Resulting Loss From Deck Collapsing Due to Rot

    Virginia Chinese Drywall and pollution exclusion

    Association May Not Make Claim Against Builder in Vermont Construction Defect Case

    Statute of Repose Dependant on When Subcontractors Finished

    No Coverage Under Ensuing Loss Provision

    Contractor Burns Down Home, Insurer Refuses Coverage

    Court Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Construction Defect Suit

    Architectural Firm Disputes Claim of Fault

    Policyholder Fails to Build Adequate Record to Support Bad Faith Claim

    In Colorado, Primary Insurers are Necessary Parties in Declaratory Judgment Actions

    An Upward Trend in Commercial Construction?

    Bill Seeks to Protect Legitimate Contractors

    Condo Owners Allege Construction Defects

    Insurance Firm Defends against $22 Million Claim

    Contractor Manslaughter? Safety Shortcuts Are Not Worth It

    Construction Delayed by Discovery of Bones

    Cogently Written Opinion Finds Coverage for Loss Caused By Defective Concrete

    Pier Fire Started by Welders

    General Contractor/Developer May Not Rely on the Homeowner Protection Act to Avoid a Waiver of Consequential Damages in an AIA Contract

    Green Buildings Could Lead to Liabilities

    Construction Defects Lead to Demolition

    Condominium Exclusion Bars Coverage for Construction Defect

    The King of Construction Defect Scams

    Businesspeople to Nevada: Revoke the Construction Defect Laws

    Homeowner may pursue negligence claim for construction defect, Oregon Supreme Court holds

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Bars Coverage for Landslide and Water Leak

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

    A Performance-Based Energy Code in Seattle: Will It Save Existing Buildings?

    Statutes of Limitations May be the Colorado Contractors’ Friend

    There Is No Non-Delegable Duty on the Part of Residential Builders in Colorado

    Pennsylvania Court Extends Construction Defect Protections to Subsequent Buyers

    Senate Committee Approves Military Construction Funds
    Corporate Profile

    ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Anaheim, California Construction Expert Witness Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Anaheim California general contracting stucco expert witnessAnaheim California general contracting forensic architectAnaheim California general contracting construction claims expert witnessAnaheim California general contracting consulting engineersAnaheim California general contracting building code compliance expert witnessAnaheim California general contracting building code expert witnessAnaheim California general contracting OSHA expert witness constructionAnaheim California general contracting construction forensic expert witnessAnaheim California general contracting engineering consultant
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

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

    August 4, 2011 — CDCoverage.com

    In Dragas Management Corp. v. Hanover Insurance Co., No. 2:10cv547 (E.D. Va. July 21, 2011), claimant residential home general contractor and developer DMC filed for arbitration against insured drywall supply and install subcontractor Porter-Blaine seeking damages for (1) the replacement of defective Chinese drywall, and (2) the repair of resulting property to other components of the DMC homes and homeowners’ personal property in seventy-four homes. Porter-Blaine’s CGL insurer Citizens and excess insurer Hanover defended Porter-Blaine in the DMC arbitration.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com


    Florida Appeals Court Rules in Favor of Homeowners Unaware of Construction Defects and Lack of Permits

    December 9, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The Florida Court of Appeals has ruled that a homeowner is not liable for defects in unpermitted alterations, reversing a lower court’s decision in Jensen v. Bailey. The Jensens sold their house to the Baileys. During the sale, the Jensens filled out a property disclosure statement, checking “no” to a question about “any improvement or additions to the property, whether by your or by others that have been constructed in violation of building codes or without necessary permits.”

    After moving in, the Baileys discovered several problems with the home. One involved a defective sewer connection leading to repeated backups. The Baileys also found problems with remodeling the Jensens had done in the kitchen, master bath, and bedroom. The remodeling work was not done with required permits nor was it up to code.

    The court noted that an earlier case, Johnson v. Davis, established four criteria: “the seller of a home must have knowledge of a defect in the property; the defect must materially affect the value of the property; the defect must not be readily observable and must be unknown to the buyer; and the buyer must establish that the seller failed to disclose the defect to the buyer.” The court found that the first of these criteria was crucial to determining the case.

    In the Johnson ruling, the then Chief Justice dissented, fearing that the courts “would ultimately construe Johnson’s requirement of actual knowledge to permit a finding of liability based on constructive knowledge,” quoting Justice Boyd, “a rule of constructive knowledge will develop based on the reasoning that if the seller did not know of the defect, he should have known about it before attempting to sell the property.” The Appeals Court concluded that the lower court hit this point in ruling on Jensen v. Bailey.

    Citing other Florida cases, the court noted that the Johnson rule does require “proof of the seller’s actual knowledge of the defect.” The court cited a case in which it was concluded that the seller “should have known” that there was circumstantial evidence was that the seller did know about the defects, as the seller had been involved in the construction of the home.

    In the case of the Jensens, the lower court concluded that they did not know that the work was defective, nor did they know that they were obligated to obtain permits for it. The Appeals Court found this one fact sufficient to reverse the decision and remand the case to the lower court for a final judgment in favor of the Jensens.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Construction Law Alert: A Specialty License May Not Be Required If Work Covered By Another License

    March 7, 2011 — By Steve Cvitanovic of Haight Brown & Bonesteel, LLP.

    Contractors should always be sure that they understand the licensing in any Subcontract or Prime Contract before entering into any agreement. However, on March 3, 2011, in the case of Pacific Casson & Shoring, Inc. v. Bernards Bros., Inc. 2011 Cal.App.Lexis 236, the Court of Appeal determined that if a specialty license is subsumed within another license, the specialty license may not be required.

    Bernards entered into a subcontract with Pacific to excavate, backfill, grade and provide geotechnical design parameters for a hospital. The Prime Contract required the bidder to maintain a Class C-12 specialty earthwork license. However, Pacific only held a Class A general engineering license which it turns out was suspended during the performance of the work. Pacific sued Bernards for nonpayment of $544,567, but the lawsuit was dismissed because the trial court found that Pacific (1) lacked a C-12 license, and (2) Pacific’s Class A license was suspended for failure to pay an unrelated judgment. Pacific was also ordered to disgorge $206,437 in prior payments.

    The Court of Appeal reversed and remanded. The Court of Appeal agreed with Pacific and held that a C-12 specialty license was not required despite the Prime Contract. The Court of Appeal found that the C-12 specialty license would have been “superfluous” since it was fully encompassed within the Class A requirements. However, the Court of Appeal also remanded the case for further

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of Steve Cvitanovic of Haight Brown & Bonesteel, LLP.


    Housing Market on Way to Recovery

    October 23, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Bloomberg News reports that new home purchases neared a two-year high, with July sales being the strongest since April 2010. Economists polled by Bloomberg expected an annual pace of 380,000 sales, the current levels are at 373,000. Strongest sales gains were in the Northeast, with a 20 percent jump. The Midwest and Western regions had small gains, and the South saw a drop of 4.9 percent. As the Northeast’s home prices are highest and the South’s the lowest, the pattern of sales lead to a sharp increase in median sales price.

    Meanwhile, existing stocks of homes continued to deplete, reaching a record low of 38,000 completed homes on the market. In response, builders are constructing new homes at a pace not seen since April 2010, accord to the Commerce Department.

    Read the full story…


    Williams v. Athletic Field: Hugely Important Lien Case Argued Before Supreme Court

    June 17, 2011 — Douglas Reiser, Builders Counsel

    Well, it finally made it. The most important Washington lien case of recent memory was argued in front of the Washington Supreme Court on Tuesday, June 14, 2011. So, what should we all expect?

    As I was reading through my RSS feeds this afternoon ? I was stopped dead in my tracks. Williams v . Athletic Field, the Division II case that has been a frequent topic here on Builders Counsel, has finally been argued before the Supreme Court. All of you who have been anxiously awaiting this day, you can check out the Supreme Court submissions by following this link.

    The Williams case has been the center of attention for construction lawyers and construction organizations over the past year. Some have called for complete lien law reform, others have tried to patch a hole in the law. Now, we can expect a ruling from the highest court in the state. That ruling will have a major impact on whether the Legislature feels compelled to change lien law.

    Read the full story…

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


    Death of Construction Defect Lawyer Ruled a Suicide

    June 19, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Clark County Coroner’s Office has concluded that Nancy Quon, the construction defect attorney implicated in the wide-ranging HOA scandal, died by her own hand. The cause of death was a combination of anti-anxiety and insomnia medication mixed with alcohol. Quon survived an earlier incident in which she took GHB and her apartment was set on fire. Quon denied that it was a suicide attempt.

    Read the full story…


    Destruction of Construction Defect Evidence Leads to Sanctions against Plaintiff

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Stating that the plaintiff’s actions have left the defendants in a situation where they “cannot properly defend the action,” a judge in the US District Court of New York has sanctioned the plaintiffs in Aktas v. JMC Dev. Co.

    The plaintiffs hired JMC Development and Stephen Jung, an architect, to renovate their vacation home in Adirnodack, New York. As work progressed, “due to disagreements regarding the completion date and payments for the project, the relationship began to deteriorate.” The plaintiffs hired George Villar as an owner’s representative who “testified that he deemed the workmanship to be ‘poor.’”

    Subsequently, the locks where changed on the home, preventing JMC from performing any additional work, after which drywall was removed, which Villar stated was so that “the engineer come and look at the framing.” Subsequently, Villar sent a letter to JMC stating that the work was “performed in an inadequate, negligent and un-professional manner.” Villar informed JMC that they were not to visit the property. Subsequently, the plaintiffs hired another firm. “Plaintiffs testified that the materials were ‘carted away’ and ‘thrown out.’”

    The plaintiffs filed a suit against JMC and others. JMC filed a motion requesting that the plaintiffs be sanctioned for their spoliation of evidence. The court noted that “the plaintiffs recognized that litigation was imminent,” and that they “had a duty to preserve the evidence. As all of JMC’s work was destroyed, there is no evidence of whether or not the work was defective. The court concluded that it will “issue an adverse inference charge that permits the jury to infer that the missing evidence was favorable to the defendants.”

    In conclusion, the court granted in part the spoliation sanctions. They granted JMC a summary judgment dismissing the plaintiffs’ claims of fraud.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Building Inspector Jailed for Taking Bribes

    September 30, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The LA Times reports that Raoul Germain, a city Los Angeles building inspector has been sentenced to 21 months in prison after pleading guilty to taking bribes. Germain was caught as part of an FBI sting operation in which he approved work in exchange for thousands of dollars in bribes. The Times notes that that in some cases, Germain never visited the construction sites. Germain was offered a chance to cooperate with investigators. His lawyer, Steve Cron asked the Times, “What do you think happens to someone who cooperates?”

    In addition to Germain, another city inspector has pleaded guilty to taking bribes and two more employees of the Department of Building and Safety have been fired in connection with the investigation.

    Read the full story…


    Homebuilding on the Rise in Nation’s Capitol

    November 7, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Is the homebuilding crunch over in DC? The Washington Post has reported that while new home construction is up throughout the country, in the DC area, construction has reached levels last seen in 2006. From January to August 2012, there were more than 19,000 building permits issued in the area, nearly doubling the number issued by that point in 2011.

    While building is on a quicker pace, what’s being built has changed. As compared to 2006, there are more townhomes, condos, and smaller homes being built. The article notes that 11 percent of new construction is condos, while in 2006, it was only 5 percent.

    Read the full story…


    Unit Owners Have No Standing to Sue under Condominium Association’s Policy

    February 10, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    If a condominium owner suffers damage caused by a leak from another unit, may it sue the insurer for the Association of Apartment Owner (AOAO) for coverage? The federal district court for Hawaii said "no" in a decision by Judge Mollway. See Peters v. Lexington Ins. Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148734 (D. Haw. December 27, 2011).

    Two cases were consolidated. In each case, Plaintiffs owned condominium units at the Watercrest Resort on Molokai. Water leaking from another unit damaged Plaintiffs’ units.

    Watercrest Resort was insured by Lexington pursuant to a policy maintained by the AOAO. Plaintiffs filed claims with Lexington. Lexington hired an adjustor.

    Unhappy with the adjustment of their claims, Plaintiffs sued Lexington and the adjustor.

    Read the full story…

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


    Damage During Roof Repairs Account for Three Occurrences

    August 2, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    Southgate Gardens Condominium had buildings damaged by Hurricane Wilma in 2005. See Mid-Continent Cas. Co. v. Basedeo, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 11864 (11th Cir. June 12, 2012). First State Development Corporation was hired by Southgate to do repairs.

    On November 1, 2005, First State completed tarping on the buildings. Thereafter, on November 11, 2005, First State contracted with Southgate to remove and replace the roofs of the Southgate Buildings.

    The tarps placed by First State were inadequate and allowed water to enter the unit of Wayne Basdeo and cause damage. Further, when it attached the tarps, First State caused holes to be made in the roofs of buildings, leading to additional damage. First State also left open the mansards (a type of roof which has two slopes on all all sides, but with the lower slope steeper that the upper one). Finally, the peeled-back condition of the roofing allowed rain to enter.

    Basdeo filed a claim with Mid-Continent.

    Read the full story…

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


    Eleventh Circuit Asks Georgia Supreme Court if Construction Defects Are Caused by an "Occurrence"

    December 20, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The Eleventh Circuit certified a question to the Georgia Supreme Court, asking whether property damage can constitute an "occurrence" under a CGL policy where its effects are not felt on "other property." HDI-Gerling Am. Ins. Co. v. Morrison Homes, Inc., 2012 U.S. App. Ct. LEXIS 23813 (11th Cir. Nov. 19, 2012).

    The general contractor, Taylor Morrison Services, Inc., was covered by a CGL policy issued by Gerling.  The policy excluded "expected or intended injury," contractual liability," and business risk exclusions. Morrison was sued by homeowners in a class action suit. Morrison had allegedly omitted four inches of gravel required beneath the base of the concrete foundations by the Uniform Building Code. Thereafter, the houses sustained water intrusion, cracks in the floors and driveways, and warped and buckling flooring.

    Gerling defended, but sued Morrison for a declaratory judgment.

    Read the full story…

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


    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…


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

    December 9, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Construction defect claims are now occurrences for insurance purposes in four states, Arkansas, Colorado, Hawaii, and South Carolina, yet there are still frustrations for commercial general liability policyholders. Business Insurance describes court decisions on whether construction defect claims are covered as “incongruous,” and this drives up coverage and litigation costs. Construction firms often find they are defending themselves on two fronts, both the construction defect claim and also whether their insurance covers it.

    Frank Armstrong, the Senior Vice President and National Director of Construction Claims for Willis North America says that the problem starts with the word “occurrence,” as various state courts have different interpretations of the word. “Certain pieces of it don’t fit well, at lest according to some courts in the country, with coverage for construction defect risks.”

    Another insurance executive, Julian Ehlich, the Senior Vice President of Claims for Aon Risk Solutions’ construction services group notes that “jurisdictions differ, so policyholders don’t know what they’re going to get.”

    Read the full story…


    Building Boom Leads to Construction Defect Cases

    August 2, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Professor Evan McKenzie of the University of Illinois at Chicago says that rise of construction defect litigation in the Las Vegas area followed the same pattern it did in other places, according to an article in the Las Vegas Review Journal. “Step one,” according to Professor McKenzie, “there was this enormous growth in construction. Then these attorneys began to swarm in from all over, especially Southern California.” McKenzie noted that during a building boom, construction “outpaces the ability of building inspectors to do their job.”

    But, despite his contention that “rapid growth in housing stock” leads to “shoddy construction,” another problem of growth was that “eventually there were too many lawyers chasing too many condominium complexes and subdivisions.” What came next was that “attorneys start coming up with cases that really aren’t good cases.” It’s in the interest of these attorneys that HOA boards sue.

    Read the full story…


    Construction Demand Unsteady, Gains in Some Regions

    June 29, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The Associated General Contractors of America reported Tuesday, June 28 that construction employment increased in 120 of the 337 metropolitan areas surveyed between May 2010 and May 2011.

    ‘While construction employment has stopped plunging, any sign of a recovery remains spotty at best,” said Ken Simonson, the association’s chief economist. ‘The close to even split between areas adding and losing jobs is a reminder that for every market doing well, there is another market that is still hurting.”

    The largest number of jobs created was in the Dallas, Texas region, with 5,600 new jobs, a five percent increase. The northern Massachusetts/southern New Hampshire region near Haverhill saw the greatest percentage increase, although that twenty-two percent increase represents only 800 new jobs. The Chicago, Illiinois area added 4,600 jobs, a four percent increase.

    Other regions were not so lucky. The Atlanta, Georgia area saw a loss of 7,400 jobs, an eight percent loss. Las Vegas also lost 7,400 jobs, which there represented a sixteen percent decline. The New York City area lost 6,700 jobs, a six percent reduction. The Riverside, California area lost 5,300 jobs, a nine percent loss.

    Stephen E. Sandherr, the association’s chief executive officer, blamed a combination of regulation and budget squeezes. "Some in Washington never met a regulation they didn’t like and others never found a penny they didn’t want to pinch. Together that makes for a bad way to boost employment and a great way to stifle the private sector and neglect critical economic infrastructure.”

    Read the full story…


    Federal District Court Continues to Find Construction Defects do Not Arise From An Occurrence

    May 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Coverage for construction defects continues to be hotly contested in Hawaii state and federal courts. In a recent decision, Judge Mollway felt bound to follow the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Burlington Ins. Co. v. Oceanic Design & Constr., Inc., 383 F.3d 940, 944 (9th Cir. 2004), where the court found construction defect claims arise from breach of contract, not from an occurrence. Judge Mollway’s most recent decision on the issue is Illinois Nat. Ins. Co. v. Nordic PCL Constr., Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58464 (D. Haw. April 26, 2012).

    Nordic constructed a grocery store for Safeway. In addition to the grocery store, Nordic built a 165-space rooftop parking deck, retail shops and related improvements. After opening for business in 2007, Safeway experienced significant leaks. Safeway demanded that Nordic repair the parking deck. Nordic sent the demand letter to the insurer, who agreed to appoint counsel subject to a reservation of rights.

    Safeway filed suit against Nordic in state court alleging, among other things, breach of contract and negligence. The insurer provided Nordic with a defense, but Nordic hired independent counsel.

    The insurer filed for declaratory relief in federal district court.

    Read the full story…


    No Coverage For Construction Defects When Complaint Alleges Contractual Damages

    September 1, 2011 — Tred Eyerley, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The underlying plaintiff’s allegations contended the contractor was in breach of contract for construction defects caused in building her home. Accordingly, the court found no coverage.See Nat’l Builders and Contractors Ins. Co. v. Slocum, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81694 (S.D. Miss. July 26, 2011).

    Slocum Construction LLC sold a home it built to Laura Peterson. Subsequently, Peterson filed suit, alleging a breach of the contract and seeking rescission and cancellation of the contract. Peterson further alleged at least thirty-three specific defects in the construction of the house.

    Slocum tendered to its insurer, National Builders and Contractors Insurance Company (NBCI). NBCI filed suit for a declaratory judgment.

    Read the full story…

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