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

    Businesspeople to Nevada: Revoke the Construction Defect Laws

    New Washington Law Nixes Unfair Indemnification in Construction Contracts

    Fifth Circuit Reverses Insurers’ Summary Judgment Award Based on "Your Work" Exclusion

    Construction Defect Destroys Home, Forty Years Later

    The Montrose Language Interpreted: How Many Policies Are Implicated By A Construction Defect That Later Causes a Flood?

    Excess Carrier Successfully Appeals Primary Insurer’s Summary Judgment Award

    Remodels Replace Construction in Redding

    Florida trigger

    Faulty Workmanship may be an Occurrence in Indiana CGL Policies

    Texas “your work” exclusion

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

    Court Grants Summary Judgment to Insurer in HVAC Defect Case

    State Audit Questions College Construction Spending in LA

    Homeowners May Not Need to Pay Lien on Defective Log Cabin

    Contractor Convicted of Additional Fraud

    Park District Sues over Leaky Roof

    Construction Demand Unsteady, Gains in Some Regions

    Construction Defects in Home a Breach of Contract

    Demand for Urban Living Leads to Austin Building Boom

    Residential Construction: Shrinking Now, Growing Later?

    Webinar on Insurance Disputes in Construction Defects

    Construction Defects Leave Animal Shelter Unusable

    Florida Chinese drywall, pollution exclusion, “your work” exclusion, and “sistership” exclusion.

    Rihanna Finds Construction Defects Hit a Sour Note

    Fire Reveals Defects, Appeals Court Affirms Judgment against Builder

    Mortar Insufficient to Insure Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Case

    No Coverage For Damage Caused by Chinese Drywall

    Connecticut Gets Medieval All Over Construction Defects

    Bar to Raise on Green Standard

    OSHA Cites Construction Firm for Safety Violations

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

    Alabama “occurrence” and subcontractor work exception to the “your completed work” exclusion

    Construction Delayed by Discovery of Bones

    Colorado Statutes of Limitations and Repose, A First Step in Construction Defect Litigation

    Seven Former North San Diego County Landfills are Leaking Contaminants

    No Coverage for Property Damage That is Limited to Work Completed by Subcontractor

    Lower Court “Eminently Reasonable” but Wrong in Construction Defect Case

    Former New York Governor to Head Construction Monitoring Firm

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

    General Contractors Must Plan to Limit Liability for Subcontractor Injury

    Battle of “Other Insurance” Clauses

    A Call to Washington: Online Permitting Saves Money and the Environment

    Construction Suit Ends with Just an Apology

    Construction on the Rise in Washington Town

    Pipes May Be Defective, But Owners Lack Standing

    Florida Property Bill Passes Economic Affairs Committee with Amendments

    Contractor Removed from Site for Lack of Insurance

    Ninety-Day Extension Denied to KB Home in Construction Defect Insurance Claim

    Renovation Contractors: Be Careful How You Disclose Your Projects

    California Posts Nation’s Largest Gain in Construction Jobs

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

    Arizona Contractor Designs Water-Repellant Cabinets

    In Re Golba: The Knaubs v. Golba and Rollison, Debtors

    Changes To Indemnification Statute Are Here! Say Hello To Defense Duties

    Mississippi exclusions j(5) and j(6) “that particular part”

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

    Save a Legal Fee: Prevent Costly Lawsuits With Claim Limitation Clauses

    Homeowner’s Policy Excludes Coverage for Loss Caused by Chinese Drywall

    South Carolina Legislature Redefining Occurrences to Include Construction Defects in CGL Policies

    Arbitration Clause Found Ambiguous in Construction Defect Case

    All Risk Policy Only Covers Repair to Portion of Dock That Sustains Damage

    Town Files Construction Lawsuit over Dust

    Contractor Sues License Board

    One Colorado Court Allows Negligence Claim by General Contractor Against Subcontractor

    Australian Developer Denies Building Problems Due to Construction Defects

    Court Strikes Down Reasonable Construction Defect Settlement

    Construction Defect Notice in the Mailbox? Respond Appropriately

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

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

    California Supreme Court Binds Homeowner Associations To Arbitration Provisions In CC&Rs

    Wine without Cheese? (Why a construction contract needs an order of precedence clause)(Law Note)

    Construction Defects Are Occurrences, Says Georgia Supreme Court

    Continuous Trigger of Coverage Adopted for Loss Under First Party Policy

    “Other Insurance” and Indemnity Provisions Determine Which Insurer Must Cover

    Landmark San Diego Hotel Settles Defects Suit for $6.4 Million

    Water Damage Covered Under Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    Ensuing Losses From Faulty Workmanship Must be Covered

    Homeowner Has No Grounds to Avoid Mechanics Lien

    Fifth Circuit Asks Texas Supreme Court to Clarify Construction Defect Decision

    When Does a Claim Against an Insurance Carrier for Failing to Defend Accrue?

    Dust Infiltration Due to Construction Defect Excluded from Policy

    Construction Jobs Expected to Rise in Post-Hurricane Rebuilding

    Architect Not Liable for Balcony’s Collapse

    Homebuilders Go Green in Response to Homebuyer Demand

    Safe Harbors- not just for Sailors anymore (or, why advance planning can prevent claims of defective plans & specs) (law note)

    Damage During Roof Repairs Account for Three Occurrences

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

    Ohio subcontractor work exception to the “your work” exclusion

    No “Special Relationship” in Oregon Construction Defect Claim

    Is Construction Heading Off the Fiscal Cliff?
    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. Drawing 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.









    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    Condominium Communities Must Complete Construction Defect Repairs, Says FHA

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Laura K. Sanchez of HindmanSanchez writes that the FHA “will not approve or recertify” any condominium community “where there are any pending or incomplete repairs within the community which are a result of a construction defect claim, regardless of whether the litigation has been resolved and regardless of whether there are funds in the bank paid by the developer to pay for the repairs.” The FHA notes that failure to complete or fund repairs could “put FHA insured loans at risk.” Communities must disclose all maintenance and repair issues to the FHA. Sanchez notes that the FHA has stated that incomplete repairs could put FHA-insured loans at risk.

    Read the full story…


    Texas “your work” exclusion

    January 6, 2012 — CDCoverage.com

    In American Home Assurance Co. v. Cat Tech, L.L.C., No. 10-20499 (5th Cir. Oct. 5, 2011), claimant Ergon hired insured Cat Tech to perform service on a reactor at Ergon’s refinery. During a start-up of the reactor after Cat Tech had completed its work, the reactor suffered damage. Cat Tech performed additional service and repairs. However, again upon start-up of the reactor, it suffered additional damage. Ergon hired another contractor to repair the reactor. Ergon initiated arbitration proceedings against Cat Tech. Cat Tech’s CGL insurer American Home defended Cat Tech against the Ergon arbitration under a reservation of rights.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com


    South Carolina Legislature Redefining Occurrences to Include Construction Defects in CGL Policies

    April 1, 2011 — April 1, 2011 Beverley BevenFlorez - Construction Defect Journal

    The question of what circumstances must be in place for construction defects to be covered in a general commercial liability (CGL) policies is being raised by the courts and the legislature in South Carolina. The Insurance Journal reports that the American Insurance Association as well as the Property and Casualty Insurers Association of America are speaking out on the issue.

    The problem seems to be centered on what defines an “occurrence.” CGL policies were not meant to cover faulty workmanship, according to the filing by the South Carolina Supreme Court. In January of this year, the South Carolina Supreme Court reversed the ruling in Crossmann Communities v Harleysville Mutual declaring that “Respondents cannot show the damage here was the result of an occurrence. Rather, the damage was a direct result and the natural and expected consequence of faulty workmanship; faulty workmanship did not cause an occurrence resulting in damage.” They focused their attention on the word “accident,” stating that there is a fortuity element that is not diminished.

    The South Carolina legislature reacted by producing a bill that would add new language directly negating the ruling by the Supreme Court. The South Carolina bill S-431 would change the definition of an occurrence in regards to construction defects as follows: “For a liability insurance policy issued to a construction professional, an ‘occurrence’ means, at a minimum: (1) an accident; or (2) continuous or repeated exposure to substantially the same general harmful condition or substance. No additional requirement of a fortuitous event is needed to constitute an ‘occurrence.’”

    S-431 is currently residing in the House Committee on Labor, Commerce and Industry.

    Read the full story...


    Housing Prices Up through Most of Country

    December 20, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Home prices in October were up more than six percent compared with prices in October 2011. The LA Times noted that some of the strongest gains were in California and Arizona. The Phoenix metropolitan area saw a 24.5% rise in home prices. In California, Riverside and Los Angeles were just above the national average, at 7.3% and 6.4%, contributing to the state’s overall nine percent increase.

    The news wasn’t good throughout the entire country, as five states did not see any price increases. Mark Fleming, the chief economist at CoreLogic, a research firm in Irvine, California said that “the housing recovery that started earlier in 2012 continues to gain momentum.

    Read the full story…


    An Upward Trend in Commercial Construction?

    March 28, 2012 — Melissa Dewey Brumback, Construction Law North Carolina

    Year-end economic indicators demonstrate that private commercial construction may be increasing in 2012, primarily as demand grows for new projects built in the United States.

    According to an article in Businessweek, the Architecture Billings Index held at 52 in December, indicating a modest expansion in the market. The American Institute of Architects said that the commercial and industrial component of the number climbed to 54.1 in December, the highest in 10 months.

    The monthly survey of U.S.-based architecture firms is one of the main indicators of nonresidential construction, and these numbers suggest that modest improvement may be on the horizon.

    The information is confirmed by data from the Census Bureau that shows that spending on lodging, office, commercial and manufacturing buildings grew 8.2 percent in November to $9.2 billion from a year ago. These types of commercial and industrial projects are historically canaries in the mine and are usually the first part of the industry to improve as the economy expands.

    Read the full story…

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


    Tucson Officials to Discuss Construction Defect Claim

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The mayor of Tucson, Arizona and the city council scheduled a meeting on June 26, 2012 in order to consult with the city’s attorneys concerning possible construction defect litigation involving the Martin Luther King, Jr. apartment building in that city. The memorandum was authored by Richard Miranda, the Tucson city manager.

    Read the full story…


    Insurer Unable to Declare its Coverage Excess In Construction Defect Case

    January 6, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a summary judgment in the case of American Family Mutual Insurance Co. v. National Fire & Marine Insurance Co. Several other insurance companies were party to this case. In the earlier case, the US District Court of Appeals for Arizona had granted a summary judgment to Ohio Casualty Group and National Fire & Marine Insurance Company. At the heart of it, is a dispute over construction defect coverage.

    The general contractor for Astragal Luxury Villas, GFTDC, contracted with American Family to provide it with a commercial liability policy. Coverage was issued to various subcontractors by Ohio Casualty and National Fire. These policies included blanket additional insured endorsements that provided coverage to GFTDC. The subcontractor policies had provisions making their coverage excess over other policies available to GFTDC.

    The need for insurance was triggered when the Astragal Condominium Unit Owners Association filed a construction defect claim in the Arizona Superior Court. CFTDC filed a third-party claim against several subcontractors. The case was settled with American Family paying the settlement, after which it filed seeking reimbursement from the subcontractor’s insurers. The court instead granted summary judgment in favor of Ohio Casualty and National Fire.

    American Family appealed to the Ninth Circuit for a review of the summary judgment, arguing that the “other insurance” clauses were “mutually repugnant and unenforceable.” The Ninth Circuit cited a case from the Arizona Court of Appeals that held that “where two policies cover the same occurrence and both contain ‘other insurance’ clauses, the excess insurance provisions are mutually repugnant and must be disregarded. Each insurer is then liable for a pro rate share of the settlement or judgment.”

    The court noted that unlike other “other insurance” cases, the American Family policy “states that it provides primary CGL coverage for CFTDC and is rendered excess only if there is ‘any other primary insurance’ available to GFTDC as an additional insured.” They note that “the American Family policy purports to convert from primary to excess coverage only if CFTDC has access to other primary insurance as an additional insured.”

    In comparison, the court noted that “the ‘other insurance’ language in Ohio Casualty’s additional insured endorsement cannot reasonably be read to contradict, or otherwise be inconsistent with, the ‘other primary insurance’ provision in the American Family policy.” They find other reasons why National Fire’s coverage did not supersede American Family’s. In this case, the policy is “written explicitly to apply in excess.”

    Finally, the Astragal settlement did not exhaust American Family’s coverage, so they were obligated to pay out the full amount. The court upheld the summary dismissal of American Family’s claims.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Construction Defect Lawsuits? There’s an App for That

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The website ebeeky.com reviews Picture It Settled, an app designed to help people engaged in lawsuits figure out where settlement strategies would be most successful. First available for Android and then iOS, the app is now available for Blackberry. One user of the application wrote that “anyone who has set through a construction defect mediation can immediately grasp the value of this app.

    The app tracks the negotiation process, allowing users to see a history of bids and counteroffers. It also models the negotiation process in order to predict the ultimate cost of settlement. These numbers are based on past similar negotiations that the user has entered.

    Read the full story…


    Ambitious Building Plans in Boston

    November 18, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Although most are unlikely to change the Boston skyline, there are several large projects on the drawing boards. The site BostInnovation covered ten of them in a recent post. Downtown Boston will be the site of several of these large projects, including three towers to be added to the Christian Science Plaza, a 404-unit residential tower in the Theater District, and perhaps the largest of these projects, a 47-story tower to be built over Copley Plaza, which will tower over the adjacent buildings. None of the planned buildings will challenge the Hancock Tower’s 60 stories.

    Read the full story…


    Ninety-Day Extension Denied to KB Home in Construction Defect Insurance Claim

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    A magistrate judge has denied a request by KB Home Nevada to extend the time for service an additional ninety days. KB claims that St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company has failed to defend them in a construction defect claim. However, the judge did grant KB an additional twenty days to effectuate service, noting that the request for additional time may be renewed.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Cleveland Condo Board Says Construction Defects Caused Leaks

    March 1, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    A Cleveland condo association has sued the developer of their building, claiming that construction defects resulted in water intrusion. The K&D Group, which still owns forty units in the 160-unit building, claim that it’s a maintenance issue that they’d like to see fixed, but it’s their responsibility as the developer. Doug Price, CEO of K&D calls it a “frivolous lawsuit.” He blames a “hostile board” and told The Plain Dealer “there’s simple maintenance that they refuse to do.”

    An outside company evaluated Stonebridge Towers. According to the condo board’s lawyer, Laura Hauser, the building design and construction are to blame for the water intrusion. Hauser said that the board’s “goal through this litigation is to find a resolution for the association, the building and the owners.”

    David Kaman, a Cleveland attorney not involved in the lawsuit, told the Plain Dealer that construction litigation in the Cleveland area had fallen off from 2007, but he sees it on the rise, which he attributes to cost-cutting on recently finished projects. “If an owner moves in and two years later the wallpaper needs to be replaced because the wall is leaking, that’s a construction defect.”

    Read the full story…


    Official Tried to Influence Judge against Shortchanged Subcontractor

    February 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    A contractor testified in the trial of former Cuyahoga County Commissioner Jimmy Dimora. According to Fox 8 in Cleveland, Ohio, Sean Newman, the president of Letter Perfect testified that his company was a subcontractor on the reconstruction of the locker rooms at the Cleveland Browns Stadium. Newman said his company was paid only $400,000 of their $650,000 bid. When Letter Perfect sued the contractor, D.A.S. Construction, Dimora called the judge to influence her to rule in favor of D.A.S.

    The judge in the earlier case, Bridgett McCafferty, has been found guilty of lying to the FBI during their investigation and is serving a 14-month prison sentence.

    Read the full story…


    Defense for Additional Insured Not Barred By Sole Negligence Provision

    August 11, 2011 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    A general contractor was entitled to a defense as an additional insured when the underlying complaint did not allege it was solely negligent. A-1 Roofing Co. v. Navigators Ins. Co., 2011 Ill. App. LEXIS 656 (Ill. Ct. App. June 24, 2011).

    A-1 was the general contractor for a roof resurfacing job at a high school. Jack Frost Iron Works Inc. (“Frost”) was one of A-1’s subcontractors. Frost had a CGL policy with Navigators Insurance Company under which A-1 was an additional insured.

    An employee of Frost’s subcontractor Midwest Sheet Metal Inc. was killed at the job site when a boom-lift he was operating flipped over. The boom-lift had been leased by another Frost subcontractor, Bakes Steel Erectors, Inc. (BSE). The deceased's estate filed suit against A-1, BSE and two other defendants.

    Read the full story…

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


    Know the Minnesota Statute of Limitations for Construction Defect Claims

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Writing on the Benson Kerrane Storz Nelson web site, Alex Nelson gives an overview of the Minnesota laws covering statutes of limitation and repose. He notes that frequently when his firm declines to take a construction defect case its’ over a missed statute of limitation. He describes the time periods as both “short” and “ambigious.” The briefest limit is that a homeowner “has only 6 months within which to give written notice of the defect to the builder once the defect has manifested itself.” Any legal action must commence within two years of the same point.

    The Minnesota statutes also have a six-year limitation, which starts for a single home at transfer of title to the first purchaser or when the purchaser takes possession, whichever happens first. For a condo, it is the last of “completion of the common element,” first unit sale or “Termination of Declarant control.” Fraud or misrepresentation also has a six-year limit, while negligence claims are limited to within the first two years “after the manifestation of the defect.”

    The statues of repose also provide limits to filing construction defect lawsuits. Mr. Nelson points out that the longest are for negligence, fraud, and “major construction defects,” all of which have a ten-year limit. On the other hand, claims against general workmanship and materials must be made in the first year.

    Read the full story…


    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…


    Defective Drains Covered Despite Water Intrusion Exclusion

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The US District Court in Washington State has granted a summary judgment in Hiller v. Allstate Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. The Hillers bought a new home in Wenatchee, Washington and insured it with an “all risk” policy from Allstate. Subsequently, Mr. Hiller discovered that the carpet in the basement was saturated with water. Hiller notified Allstate who requested that he determine the source of the water intrusion. Hiller poured water into a downspout drain and found this caused water to leak into the home’s basement.

    Further investigation with the homes original excavation contractor revealed that “the end of the drain pipe was partially blocked by rocks and had been wrapped with fabric landscaping material.” Additionally, “a ‘T’ pipe installed at the foot of the drain was directing water toward the house’s concrete foundation.” Allstate denied the claim “under the policy’s surface water, subsurface water, inherent vice, and latent defect exlusions.” After the denial, Hiller “discovered that the foundation had not been treated with waterproof sealant and that several concrete form pins were still in place.”

    The court noted that “there is no genuine dispute about the cause of the claimed loss.” This left the court concluding that “the only relevant question for the purposes of the instant cross-motions for summary judgment is whether a loss caused by defective construction is covered under the Hillers’ ‘all risk’ insurance policy.” Under Washington’s “efficient proximate cause” rule, “where an insured risk itself sets into operation a chain of causation in which the last step may have en an excepted risk, the excepted risk will not defeat recovery.” The court found that a loss caused by defective construction is in fact covered under the policy, noting that “the policy does not contain an exclusion for defective construction.”

    The court concluded that the defective drain was not an inherent vice, as it “cannot properly be characterized as defects ‘inherent [in the] nature of the commodity which will cause it to deteriorate with a lapse of time.” Nor was it a latent defect, “one that could not have been discovered by inspection.” The court concluded that “both of the construction defects at issue could have been discovered by a reasonable inspection.”

    With these facts determined, the court found for the Hillers.

    Read the court»s decision…


    Cabinetmaker Exceeds Expectations as Conditions Improve

    October 23, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    American Woodmark, the manufacturer of several national brands of cabinets and vanities, saw greater than anticipated earnings in its most recent quarter. Their revenue was $148.3 million, an increase of 13% over the same quarter a year prior. They saw a 40% increase in sales. As a result, their per-share earnings were 7 cents, instead of the projected loss of 3 cents per share. Forbes reports that the share price for American Woodmark has been rising in August 2012.

    Read the full story…


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

    April 27, 2011 — April 27, 2011, by CDCoverage.com

    In Markel American Ins. Co. v. Lennar Corp., No. 14-10-00008-CV (Tex. Ct. App. April 19, 2011), insured homebuilder Lennar filed suit against its insurer Markel seeking recovery of costs incurred by Lennar to repair water damage to homes resulting from defective EIFS siding. Following a jury trial, judgment was entered in favor of Lennar and against Markel. On appeal, the intermediate appellate court reversed. Applying Texas law, the court first held that Lennar failed to satisfy its burden of allocating damages between covered and uncovered. In a prior decision, the court had held that, while the costs incurred by Lennar for the repair of the resulting water damage

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com