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

    Housing Market on Way to Recovery

    Construction Company Head Pleads Guilty to Insurance and Tax Fraud

    Repair of Part May Necessitate Replacement of Whole

    Des Moines Home Builders Building for Habitat for Humanity

    Condo Buyers Seek to Void Sale over Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Defective Drains Covered Despite Water Intrusion Exclusion

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

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

    Insurance Company Must Show that Lead Came from Building Materials

    Preventing Costly Litigation Through Your Construction Contract

    Bound by Group Builders, Federal District Court Finds No Occurrence

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

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

    Former New York Governor to Head Construction Monitoring Firm

    A Loud Boom, But No Serious Injuries in World Trade Center Accident

    No Coverage For Construction Defects When Complaint Alleges Contractual Damages

    Homeowner Has No Grounds to Avoid Mechanics Lien

    School District Marks End of Construction Project by Hiring Lawyers

    Know the Minnesota Statute of Limitations for Construction Defect Claims

    Five Years of Great Legal Blogging at Insurance Law Hawaii

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

    Construction Employment Rises in Half of the States

    Contractor Underpaid Workers, Pocketed the Difference

    Retaining Wall Contractor Not Responsible for Building Damage

    Steps to Defending against Construction Defect Lawsuits

    Harmon Hotel Construction Defect Update

    Architect Not Responsible for Injuries to Guests

    Product Exclusion: The Big Reason Behind The Delay of LEED 2012

    Pennsylvania Court Extends Construction Defect Protections to Subsequent Buyers

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Construction Defect Claims

    Construction Law: Unexpected, Fascinating, Bizarre

    Contractual Liability Exclusion Bars Coverage

    Surveyors Statute Trumps Construction Defect Claim in Tennessee

    The U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals Rules on Greystone

    New OSHA Fall Rules to Start Early in Minnesota

    Delaware “occurrence” and exclusions j(5) and j(6)

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

    Analysis of the “owned property exclusion” under Panico v. State Farm

    Construction on the Rise in Washington Town

    Another Guilty Plea In Nevada Construction Defect Fraud Case

    Remodels Replace Construction in Redding

    Ohio Casualty’s and Beazer’s Motions were Granted in Part, and Denied in Part

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

    Foundation Arbitration Doesn’t Preclude Suing Over Cracks

    Is There a Conflict of Interest When a CD Defense Attorney Becomes Coverage Counsel Post-Litigation?

    Ensuing Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

    Construction Defect Lawsuit Stayed by SB800

    Contractor Manslaughter? Safety Shortcuts Are Not Worth It

    Construction Defects Not Occurrences under Ohio Law

    Tennessee Court: Window Openings Too Small, Judgment Too Large

    Coverage Rejected Under Owned Property and Alienated Property Exclusions

    Landmark San Diego Hotel Settles Defects Suit for $6.4 Million

    Construction Defect Not Occurrences, Says Hawaii Court

    More Charges in Las Vegas HOA Construction Defect Scam

    Liability policy covers negligent construction: GA high court

    State Farm Too Quick To Deny Coverage, Court Rules

    Damage During Roof Repairs Account for Three Occurrences

    Judge Okays Harmon Tower Demolition, Also Calls for More Testing

    After Construction Defect Case, Repairs to Austin Building

    Contractor Removed from Site for Lack of Insurance

    Washington Court Limits Lien Rights of Construction Managers

    No “Special Relationship” in Oregon Construction Defect Claim

    Washington Court of Appeals Upholds Standard of Repose in Fruit Warehouse Case

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

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

    Arizona Homeowners Must Give Notice of Construction Defect Claims

    Kansas Man Caught for Construction Scam in Virginia

    Is Construction Heading Off the Fiscal Cliff?

    Federal Court Denies Summary Judgment in Leaky Condo Conversion

    BUILD Act Inching Closer To Reality

    Limitations of Liability in Subcontractors’ Contracts May Not Be Enforceable in Colorado to Limit Claims by Construction Professionals.

    Courts Are Conflicted As To Whether "Good Faith" Settlement Determinations Can Be Reviewed Via Writ Petition Or Appeal

    Construction Defects and Contractor-Owners

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

    Defense for Additional Insured Not Barred By Sole Negligence Provision

    Conspirators Bilked Homeowners in Nevada Construction Defect Claims

    Boston’s Tunnel Project Plagued by Water

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

    No-Show Contractor Can’t Hide from Construction Defect Claim

    Construction Upturn in Silicon Valley

    Defect Claims as Occurrences? Check Your State Laws

    No Coverage Under Ensuing Loss Provision

    Construction Defect Case Not Over, Despite Summary Judgment

    Brown Paint Doesn’t Cover Up Construction Defects

    Increased Expenditure on Injuries for New York City School Construction

    Construction Defects in Home a Breach of Contract

    Exact Dates Not Needed for Construction Defect Insurance Claim

    Construction Job Opening Rise in October

    Broker Not Liable for Failure to Reveal Insurer's Insolvency After Policy Issued

    Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Case Cannot Be Overturned While Facts Are Still in Contention in Related Cases
    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.

    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    Follow Up on Continental Western v. Shay Construction

    March 28, 2012 — Brady Iandiorio, Colorado Construction Litigation

    Writing in Construction Law Colorado, Brady Iandiorio revisits the case Continental Western v. Shay Construction. He promises to continue to follow cases dealing with Colorado HB 10-1394.

    Recently the Court ruled on two Motions to Reconsider filed by Defendants Milender White and Shay Construction.

    Procedurally, the Motions to Reconsider were ruled on by the Honorable William J. Martinez, because the day after the motions were filed the action was reassigned to Judge Martinez. In the short analysis of the Motion to Reconsider, the court leaned on Judge Walker D. Miller’s ruling on the summary judgment and his analysis of the (j)(5) and (j)(6) exclusions.

    As a quick refresher regarding the grant of summary judgment, Judge Miller agreed with Continental Western’s argument that the asserted claims were excluded under the “damage to property” exclusion. The policy’s exclusions state: “(j) Damage to Property . . . (5) that particular part of real property on which you or any contractors or subcontractors working directly or indirectly on your behalf are performing operations, if the ‘property damage’ arises out of those operations; or (6) that particular part of any property that must be restored, repaired or replaced because ‘your work’ was incorrectly performed on it.” Judge Miller found that both exclusions (j)(5) and (6) applied to both Shay’s allegedly defective work.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Brady Iandiorio of Higgins, Hopkins, McClain & Roswell, LLC. Mr. Iandiorio can be contacted at iandiorio@hhmrlaw.com.


    Irene May Benefit Construction Industry

    September 1, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Noting that while it wasn’t the $15 billion disaster some predicted, Hurricane Irene still caused quite a bit of damage on its path up the Eastern Seaboard. Martha White, reporting for MSNBC cites Kinetc Analysis Corp. with an estimate of $7 billion in damage. Carl Van Horn, a professor of public policy at Rutgers University expected an initial decline in construction jobs, due to projects delayed due to the storm’s arrival, but he said, “a few weeks later, employment picks up as people rebuild.”

    Kinetic says that one unknown is how much of the damage is insured. They expect only $3 billion of damage will be covered by insurance. This would likely put a drag on consumer spending, as homeowners would have to dig into their own pockets to pay for repairs, according to Karl Smith, associate professor of economics and government at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

    Read the full story…


    Changes to Arkansas Construction and Home Repair Laws

    September 30, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    A new law, set to take effect in 2012, lowers the ceiling on when work must be done by a licensed contractor. Through the end of the year, projects costing $20,000 or more had to be done by an Arkansas licensed contractor. As of January 1, 2012, that new limit will be $2,000.

    This will apply to all single-family residences and according to Lovely County Citizen, covers “construction, alteration, renovation, repair, modification, improvement, removal, demotion, or addition to a pre-existing structure.” Residential building contractors will be required to have workers compensation insurance, as will home improvement contactors if they take jobs worth more than $20,000.

    Morris Dillow, a building inspector in Holiday Island, said, “It will get these scammers out of here who are ripping people off.” He cited the example of a contractor who after getting paid for roof repairs and painting, left the job unfinished.

    Read the full story…


    Construction Defects Lead to Demolition of Seattle’s 25-story McGuire Apartments Building

    March 16, 2011 — March 16, 2011 Construction Defect Journal Staff

    According to a story published last Thursday in Seattle PI: " The 25-story McGuire Apartments, at Second Avenue and Wall Street, would cost more to fix than the building is worth, according to its owners. Its most serious defect involves steel cables that are corroding inside of concrete slabs because the ends weren’t properly treated with a rust-proof coating and a pocket in the edge of the concrete that wasn’t properly sealed"

    The report by Aubrey Cohen outlines the demolition plans which are expected to take between 12 and 18 months, and will utilize robotic Brokk Machines. The demolition plan calls for one story at a time to be demolished, with the debris to be trucked offsite. Demolition plans aim to minimize disruption to residents and businesses in the area by Limiting work 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. on weekdays and 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. Saturdays with "impact and percussive activities" limited to 8 a.m to 5 p.m weekdays.

    Read More...


    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…


    Is Construction Heading Off the Fiscal Cliff?

    December 20, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    After a period of growth, the construction industry lost 20,000 jobs in November, based on the federal jobs data. Damon Scott of New Mexico Business Weekly suggests that contractors may have laid off employees in anticipation of the “fiscal cliff.” Ken Simpson, the chief economist of the National Association of Home Builders said in a press release that “it is discouraging that construction employment is still struggling after three years of expansion in the overall economy.”

    Read the full story…


    Construction on the Rise in Washington Town

    June 16, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The Kitsap Sun reports that Gig Harbor, a town in the area near Tacoma, Washington, has had a 60% increase in building permit applications as compared to 2010. May, 2011 had as many permits issued for single-family residences in Gig Harbor as were issued for all of 2010. Additionally, a Safeway shopping center on Point Fosdick is described by Dick Bower, Gig Harbor Building and Fire Safety Director, as “a huge project and it’s going to bring in quite a bit of revenue.” He called the increase in building “economic recovery at the grassroots level.”

    Bower said that the building officials in other towns have also seen upswings in construction. He anticipates more activity in the future.

    Read the full story…


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

    April 25, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Writing in Oregon’s Daily Journal of Commerce, David Anderson looks at the aftermath of the case Abraham v. T. Henry Construction, Inc. In that case, Anderson notes that “the homeowners hired a contractor to build their house, and subsequently discovered extensive water damage” “after expiration of the time to sue for breach of contract.” The homeowners claimed negligence. Oregon’s Supreme Court concluded that “homeowners only had to prove that the contractor negligently caused reasonably foreseeable harm to the homeowner’s property.”

    Anderson views this decision as leading to two risks for contractors. “First, contractors can be held liable in tort for breaching building code standards; second, they can be held liable for violating the often-difficult-to-define ‘reasonable care’ standard.” But here, “contract can be king.” The Oregon Supreme Court noted that the contractor “could have avoided exposure to the general ‘reasonable care’ standard by more carefully defining its obligations in the original construction contract.”

    He notes that contractors who fail to define their obligations or use generic definitions “may be exposing themselves to a more vague scope of liability.”

    Read the full story…


    Manhattan Developer Breaks Ground on $520 Million Project

    November 18, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Rebuilding an area of Midtown West that has been condemned for decades, the Gotham Organization has broken ground on a 1,200-unit project that will include housing for a variety of household incomes and a school. One unit of the project will be affordable housing for families of annual incomes up to $40,000. Another will be for middle-income households. Additionally, there will be a 31-story tower with 550 luxury units.

    The site CityBiz quotes Mayor Michael Bloomberg, as saying that the project “will grow our economy by creating 2,900 construction-related jobs.” The president of the Gotham Organization, David L. Picket notes that it will “create hundreds of new jobs, generate millions of dollars in revenue for the construction industry, contribute towards the building of a new primary, and provide homes to thousands of New Yorkers.”

    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…


    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…


    The Year 2010 In Review: Design And Construction Defects Litigation

    February 25, 2011 — Candace Matson, Harold Hamersmith, and Helen Lauderdale - Construction & Infrastructure Law Blog - February 25, 2011

    This article is the first in a series summarizing construction law developments for 2010

    1. Centex Homes v. Financial Pacific Life Insurance Co., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1995 (E.D. Cal. 2010)

    After settling numerous homeowners’ construction defect claims — and more than ten years after the homes were substantially completed — a home developer brought suit against one of the concrete fabrication subcontractors for the development seeking indemnity for amounts paid to the homeowners, as well as for damages for breach of the subcontractor’s duties to procure specific insurance and to defend the developer against the homeowners’ claims. The subcontractor brought a motion for summary adjudication on the ground the developer’s claims were barred by the ten year statute of repose contained in Code of Civil Procedure Section 337.15.

    The District Court agreed the developer’s claim for indemnity was barred by Section 337.15. And it held that because the damages recoverable for breach of the subcontractor’s duty to purchase insurance are identical to the damages recoverable through the developer’s indemnity claim, the breach of duty to procure insurance claim also was time-barred. The District Court, however, allowed the claim for breach of the duty to defend to proceed. The categories of losses associated with such a claim (attorneys’ fees and other defense costs) are distinct from the damages recoverable through claims governed by Section 337.15 (latent deficiency in the design and construction of the homes and injury to property arising out of the latent deficiencies).

    2. UDC — Universal Development v. CH2M Hill, 181 Cal. App. 4th 10 (6th Dist. Jan. 2010)

    Indemnification clauses in construction agreements often state that one party to the agreement — the “indemnitor” — will defend and indemnify the other party from particular types of claims. Of course, having a contract right to a defense is not the same as actually receiving a defense. Any indemnitor attempting to avoid paying for defense costs can simply deny the tender of defense with the hope that when the underlying claim is resolved the defense obligations will be forgotten. In the past, when parties entitled to a defense — the “indemnitees” — had long memories and pressed to recover defense costs, indemnitors attempted to justify denying the tender by claiming their defense obligations coincided with their indemnity obligations and neither arose until a final determination was made that the underlying claim was one for which indemnity was owed.

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of Candace Matson, Harold Hamersmith, and Helen Lauderdale, Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP. Ms. Matson can be contacted at cmatson@sheppardmullin.com, Mr. Hamersmith can be contacted at hhamersmith@sheppardmullin.com, and Ms. Lauderdale can be contacted at hlauderdale@sheppardmullin.com.


    Pennsylvania Court Extends Construction Defect Protections to Subsequent Buyers

    December 20, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Pennsylvania courts have long held that there is an implied warranty of habitability for the initial purchaser of a home. Now, as some defects may not immediately show up, the court has extended that implied warranty to second and subsequent purchasers. As Marc D. Brookman, David I. Haas, and Christopher Bender of Duane Morris note, “this judicially created doctrine shifts the risk of a latent defect in the construction of a new home from the purchaser to the builder-vendor.”

    The Pennsylvania Supreme Court concluded that a contractual relationship is not needed for an implied warranty of habitability. The court’s concern was inequalities would result when a home was sold while other homes were protected by being within the statute of repose.

    Read the full story…


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

    May 18, 2011 — May 18, 2011 - CDCoverage.com

    In JTO, Inc. v. State Automobile Mut. Ins. Co., No. 2010-L-062 (Ohio Ct. App. March 25, 2011), general contractor JTO was sued by hotel project owner Marriott for breach of contract and warranties seeking damages for the repair of construction defects resulting in moisture penetration property damage to interior components. JTO filed a third party complaint against subcontractor Farizel and also tendered its defense as an additional insured under Farizel’s State Auto CGL policy.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com


    Census Bureau, HUD Show Declines in Residential Construction

    May 17, 2011 – CDJ Staff

    The U.S. Census Bureau and the Department of Housing and Urban Development released their summary of residential construction for April 2011 on May 17.

    Building permits for privately owned housing units were down 4% from last month and 12% from last year. Similarly, privately-owned housing starts were down 10% from March and 23% below the previous year.

    For further details, read the Census Bureau/HUD report


    General Contractors Must Plan to Limit Liability for Subcontractor Injury

    May 18, 2011 — May 18, 2011 - Douglas Reiser in the Builders Counsel Blog

    It takes more than a hard hat, but safety checks, a good policy and a smart contract might save you some problems.If you are a general contractor, you will want to pay close attention to this article. A new Washington appellate decision showcases a general contractor’s liability to subcontractors who are injured on the job, when security barriers fail. But can a general limit this liability? Will its contract help?

    In Wrought Corporation, Inc., Appellant V. Mario Interiano (quick note: this opinion is unpublished, but we are here to talk about an issue that was not determined on appeal – WISHA compliance), a subcontractor was injured when a security barrier failed and he fell into an elevator shaft.

    A jury awarded a $1.56 million verdict against the general contractor, and the court of appeals affirmed on the basis that the general contractor has a non-delegable duty to ensure compliance with the Washington Industrial Safety and Health Act of 1973, codified under RCW 49.17 (WISHA).

    Read the full story…

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


    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


    Negligent Misrepresentation in Sale of Building Altered without Permits

    September 30, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The Supreme Court of New Hampshire has ruled in the case Wyle v. Lees. The Leeses owned a two-unit apartment building in North Conway, New Hampshire. They hired a contractor to add a third, larger apartment, including a two-car garage. The Leeses and their contractor submitted a building permit application. They were informed that site plan review was required. After receiving approval on the site plan, construction started. At no point did they obtain a building permit and the construction was never inspected. The Leeses subsequently added more space to the unit, reducing parking spaces below the minimum required. Again, they did not obtain a building permit.

    In 2007, three years after all these changes were complete, the Leeses sold their building to Mr. Wyle. To the question “are you aware of any modifications or repairs made without the necessary permits?” they answered “no.” About six weeks after closing, Wyle “received a letter from the town code enforcement officer regarding the legality of the removal of a garage door from the new unit.” A subsequent inspection revealed “numerous building and life safety code violations.”

    Mr. Wyle brought a claim against the Leeses for negligent misrepresentation. The defendants filed a motion “seeking to preclude economic loss damages.” At a two-day bench trial, Mr. Wyle won. The Leeses appealed.

    The appeals court found that “the defendants negligently misrepresented that the premises were licensed for immediate occupancy and that the defendants had obtained all necessary permits,” and thus upheld the lower court’s finding of negligent misrepresentation. The appeals court also rejected the Leeses’ argument that damages must be apportioned on all parties, including “the plaintiff himself, the plaintiff’s building inspector, and the defendant’s contractor,” finding a lack of “adequate evidence.”

    The Leeses further argued that they were unaware that modifications and repairs were accomplished without the required permits. The appeals court noted that “the trial court found that both the conditional approval and final approval for the site plan stated that a building permit and a certificate of occupancy were required prior to any use.” The court concluded that the Leeses “knew or should have known of the falsity of their representation.”

    The appeals affirmed the findings of the trial court.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Texas Windstorm Insurance Agency Under Scrutiny

    April 5, 2011 — April 5, 2011 Beverley BevenFlorez - Construction Defect Journal

    Representative Larry Taylor has introduced a bill in the Texas Legislature (HB 2818) that would further regulate the Texas Windstorm Insurance Agency (TWIA). According to Taylor, “In order to be adequately prepared for future hurricane seasons, it is imperative that TWIA be operating at maximum efficiency, that the Reserve Trust Fund be solvent and that the agency have adequate management measures in place to protect consumers and ensure that claims are paid in a timely manner. House Bill 2818 is an important step in the right direction toward restoring public confidence in TWIA.”

    HB 2818 includes measures that would create an expert panel that would advise the commissioner on how to evaluate loss from the storm, and a greater transparency of TWIA Board meetings and actions.

    In addition, the Texas Department of Insurance (TDI) has placed TWIA on Administrative Oversight. According to TDI, “While under Administrative Oversight, the Department may require its prior review and approval of executive decisions, certain expenditures, and other transactions. The insurer is required to fully cooperate with the Department and provide complete and timely disclosure of all information responsive to Department requests.”

    Read the full story (Rep. Taylor’s Press Release)...

    Read the full story (Texas Department of Insurance’s Press Release)...