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

    Cogently Written Opinion Finds Coverage for Loss Caused By Defective Concrete

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

    Allowing the Use of a General Verdict Form in a Construction Defect Case Could Subject Your Client to Prejudgment Interest

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

    Godfather Charged with Insurance Fraud

    Court Clarifies Sequence in California’s SB800

    More Charges in Las Vegas HOA Scandal

    Liability policy covers negligent construction: GA high court

    Court Grants Summary Judgment to Insurer in HVAC Defect Case

    Former Zurich Executive to Head Willis North America Construction Insurance Group

    Crane Dangles and So Do Insurance Questions

    More Charges in Las Vegas HOA Construction Defect Scam

    Counterpoint: Washington Supreme Court to Rule on Resulting Losses in Insurance Disputes

    Georgia Supreme Court Rules Construction Defects Can Constitute an Occurrence in CGL Policies

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

    Gilroy Homeowners Sue over Leaky Homes

    Arbitration Clause Not Binding on Association in Construction Defect Claim

    Oregon agreement to procure insurance, anti-indemnity statute, and self-insured retention

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

    Congress Addresses Homebuilding Credit Crunch

    2011 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar – Recap

    Architect Not Responsible for Injuries to Guests

    Construction Defects Are Occurrences, Says South Carolina High Court

    Ensuing Losses From Faulty Workmanship Must be Covered

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

    Construction Defect Journal Marks First Anniversary

    Hospital Construction Firm Settles Defect Claim for $1.1 Million

    Important Information Regarding Colorado Mechanic’s Lien Rights.

    Insurer Beware: Failure to Defend Ends with Hefty Verdict

    Defective Drains Covered Despite Water Intrusion Exclusion

    Contractor Convicted of Additional Fraud

    Court Rules on a Long List of Motions in Illinois National Insurance Co v Nordic PCL

    Follow Up on Continental Western v. Shay Construction

    Preventing Costly Litigation Through Your Construction Contract

    No Resulting Loss From Deck Collapsing Due to Rot

    Cleveland Condo Board Says Construction Defects Caused Leaks

    Florida Construction Defect Case Settled for $3 Million

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

    JDi Data Introduces Mobile App for Litigation Cost Allocation

    Going Green for Lower Permit Fees

    Florida Contractor on Trial for Bribing School Official

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

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

    Drug Company Provides Cure for Development Woes

    Texas Windstorm Insurance Agency Under Scrutiny

    Construction Firm Charged for Creating “Hail” Damage

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

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

    North Carolina Exclusion j(6) “That Particular Part”

    Judge Kobayashi Determines No Coverage for Construction Defect Claim

    Does the New Jersey Right-To-Repair Law Omit Too Many Construction Defects?

    Avoid Gaps in Construction Defect Coverage

    Insurer Able to Refuse Coverage for Failed Retaining Wall

    Construction Delayed by Discovery of Bones

    Colorado Senate Bill 12-181: 2012’s Version of a Prompt Pay Bill

    Supreme Court of New York Denies Motion in all but One Cause of Action in Kikirov v. 355 Realty Assoc., et al.

    Official Tried to Influence Judge against Shortchanged Subcontractor

    Pier Fire Started by Welders

    FHA Lists Bridges and Overpasses that May Have Defective Grout

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

    Florida trigger

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

    Lien Claimant’s Right to Execute against Bond Upheld in Court of Appeals

    Geometrically Defined Drainage Cavities in EIFS as a Guard Against Defects

    Water Damage Covered Under Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    Construction Defect Not an Occurrence in Ohio

    New Construction Laws, New Forms in California

    Partial Settlement in DeKalb Construction Management Case

    Recent Case Brings Clarity and Questions to Statute of Repose Application

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

    Colorado Court of Appeals holds that insurance companies owe duty of prompt and effective communication to claimants and repair subcontractors

    Fourteen More Guilty Pleas in Las Vegas Construction Defect Scam

    Ensuing Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

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

    BHA Expands Construction Experts Group

    No Coverage for Counterclaim Alleging Construction Defects Pled as Breach of Contract

    No Third-Quarter Gain for Construction

    Lockton Expands Construction and Design Team

    Architectural Firm Disputes Claim of Fault

    Excess Carrier Successfully Appeals Primary Insurer’s Summary Judgment Award

    Differing Rulings On Construction Defect Claims Leave Unanswered Questions For Builders, and Construction Practice Groups. Impact to CGL Carriers, General Contractors, Builders Remains Unclear

    School District Settles Construction Lawsuit

    Appeals Court Upholds Decision by Referee in Trial Court for Antagan v Shea Homes

    Boyfriend Pleads Guilty in Las Vegas Construction Defect Scam Suicide

    Bad Faith and a Partial Summary Judgment in Seattle Construction Defect Case

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

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

    Illinois Court Determines Insurer Must Defend Property Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship

    Pictorial Construction Terminology Dictionary — A Quick and Helpful Reference

    US Courts in Nevada Busy with Yellow Brass
    Corporate Profile

    ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

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

    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    Homebuilders Go Green in Response to Homebuyer Demand

    May 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    McGrawHill Construction reports that 17 percent of new homes and remodels in 2011 were done with green building practices. Their report estimates that by 2016, this will rise to 29 to 38 percent of the market for home construction and remodeling.

    Consumers see the green buildings as more desirable, particularly where they are more energy efficient. Two thirds of builders noted their customers were interested in features that would lower the energy use of their homes. Consumers also feel that green building materials are more durable and see green homes as higher quality.

    Read the full story…


    Nevada Court Adopts Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    February 10, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    Although the Nevada Supreme Court adopted the efficient proximate cause doctrine, it determined it did not apply to salvage coverage under an all-risk policy for a rain-damaged building. Fourth Street Place, LLC v. The Travelers Indemn. Co., 2011 Nev LEXIS 114 (Nev. Dec. 29, 2011).

    Fourth Street owned an office building which was insured by an all-risk policy issued by Travelers. Fourth Street hired Above It All Roofing to repair the roof of the office building. Above It All removed the waterproof membrane on the roof and prepared to replace the membrane the following week. Over the weekend, however, substantial rain hit. On Sunday, Above It All returned to cover the exposed portions of the roof with tarps, but wind later blew the tarps away. The building suffered significant interior damage as it continued to be exposed to the rain.

    Read the full story…

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


    Pipes May Be Defective, But Owners Lack Standing

    September 13, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The United States District Court in Minnesota has determined that Steven and Cecilia Thundander cannot make a class-action claim against Uponor, Inc. over the plumbing in their home, as they do not have Article III standing. In this situation, the alleged defect is that Uponor made fraudulent claims that the pipes met National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) standards for use in potable water systems. Uponor submitted samples of other pipes, and their substitution was discovered when the NSF made an inspection of the manufacturing facility. The court noted that “the Thunanders contend that Uponor failed to inform homeowners, plumbers and consumers that it had been selling pipe that failed to meet NSF toxicity requirements at the time of sale and installation.”

    The Court noted that the Thunanders have not tested their piping to determine if they “demonstrate toxicity or lack of compliance with the NSF 61 standards,” noting also that the Complaint seeks to require Uponor to instruct the plaintiffs on “how to test the piping and water to determine the level of risk.” Lacking testing, the Court could not find that the Thundanders have defective pipes. The Court found that the “Plaintiffs have failed to adequately plead an injury in fact sufficient to confer standing as to their product liability claims.”

    The Court also concluded that it could not determine if the Plaintiff’s warranty actions could not be applied, as they “have failed to allege a plausible defect.” Even in the presence of a defect, the Court noted that more than eight years had passed before the filing of the suit, when the warranties under both Indiana and Minnesota law have a four-year statute of limitations. The Court also rejected the Thunanders tort claims, once again because “Plaintiffs have not tested their pipes,” noting that “a tort requires the existence of an injury.”

    In conclusion, Judge Nelson rejected the entirety of the complaint, granting the motions to dismiss by the defendants. However, despite the problems with the Thunanders’ claims, she found that they were not “patently frivolous or groundless.” Therefore, she denied attorney fees requested by one of the defendants.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Vegas Hi-Rise Not Earthquake Safe

    July 12, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    If an earthquake hit Las Vegas, the Harmon Tower would not withstand it. A report from Weidlinger Associates told MGM Resorts that “in a code-level earthquake, using either the permitted or current code specified loads, it is likely that critical structural members in the tower will fail and become incapable of supporting gravity loads, leading to a partial or complete collapse of the tower.” The inspection came at the request of county officials, according to the article in Forbes.

    According to Ronald Lynn, directory of the building division in the county’s development services division, “these deficiencies, in their current state, make the building uninhabitable.” The county is concerned about risks to adjacent buildings.

    MGM Resorts is currently in litigation, separate from the stability issues, with Perini Corp., the builders of Harmon Tower.

    Read the full story…


    Nevada Assembly Sends Construction Defect Bill to Senate

    June 6, 2011 — CDJ Staff

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

    Read the full story…


    A Lien Might Just Save Your Small Construction Business

    April 4, 2011 — Douglas Reiser in the Builders Counsel Blog

    Many owners incorrectly believe that payment to the general contractor gets the owner off the hook for payment to subcontractors and suppliers. This assumption sometimes fosters the irresponsible owner, who fails to ensure that everyone is getting paid. Fortunately for those contractors further down the contracting chain, this assumption is incorrect.

    Suppliers and subcontractors can file a lien to secure payment for their labor and materials. A filing party must offer proper notice (if applicable) and file an adequate and timely lien in the County where the work is performed. You can read our earlier posts on these topics by following this link.

    A lien notice and a lien put an owner on notice that your business has provided labor and/or materials for the improvement of the owner’s property (See RCW 60.04.031 for more info). If the owner fails to take care to ensure that your business is paid the law mandates that the owner may have to pay twice.

    Read the full story...

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


    Underpowered AC Not a Construction Defect

    November 7, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    After buying a home in Louisiana, Mike Gines determined that the home’s air conditioning unit was insufficient to maintain an appropriate temperature. He contacted the home builder, D.R. Horton, Inc., which worked with the air conditioning installer, Reliant Heating & Air Conditioning, in order to repair the system. When the problems persisted, Gines filed a class action petition against Horton and Reliant in state court. Horton and Reliant moved the case to the federal courts, whereupon Gines asserted the defendants were in violation of the Louisiana New Home Warranty Act (NHWA). Horton stated that the claim under the NHWA was invalid, because Gines had not alleged actual physical damage to his home.

    The district court granted Horton’s motion to dismiss. Gines sought a reversal from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and sought to have two questions of state law addressed by the Louisiana Supreme Court.

    The district court ruled that the NHWA was the “sole remedy under Louisiana law for a purchaser of a new home with construction defects. Gines argued that court erred in this, but also conceded that this was the conclusion of the Louisiana Supreme Court.

    Further, Gines argued that a provision in the NHWA that allows the inclusion of construction defects that do not cause damage was satisfied by paragraph 6 of the contract. The court noted that Gines did not attach a copy of the contract to either the original or amended complaint, and so the court does not need to address these claims. However, the court cautioned that if a copy had been included, they still would have rejected the claim, as “the cited language does not indicate a waiver of the physical damage requirement.” They also note that “paragraph 13 of the contract shows that Gines was aware to the absence of any such waiver in the contract.”

    The court concludes that “the moral of this story is that in order to avoid the harsh result that has obtained here, the buyer of a newly constructed home in Louisiana should seek to obtain in the contract of sale an express waiver of the actual damage requirement of the NHWA.” The appeals court affirmed the decision of the circuit court and denied the application to certify questions to the Louisiana Supreme Court.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Insurance Policy Provides No Coverage For Slab Collapse in Vision One

    August 17, 2011 — Douglas Reiser, Builders Counsel

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

    Background

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

    Read the full story…

    Read the court’s decision…

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


    Workers Hurt in Casino Floor Collapse

    February 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    More than a dozen construction workers fell about thirty feet when a floor collapsed in a Cincinnati casino. The workers were pouring cement on the second-floor level when the accident happened. The area in question will be the gaming area in the completed casino. Scott Allen, OSHA’s regional spokesperson, said their investigation of the accident would probably take about a month to complete.

    The cause of the collapse is still undetermined. Although the weather has been wet in the area, experts thought it unlikely to be the cause. A construction forensics professor at Ohio State University said that “concrete pouring is very common” and that “you cannot go wrong unless something happens with the connection.” Engineering experts said it was more likely an issue with the metal decking.

    Read the full story…


    Contractor Manslaughter? Safety Shortcuts Are Not Worth It

    August 11, 2011 — Douglas Reiser, Builders Counsel

    It’s been a while since I discussed the importance of safety. But, a recent article on ENR.com compelled this brief article. Don’t shortcut safety — you could be facing serious criminal repercussions.

    A New York crane company owner and one of his employees are each facing a second-degree manslaughter charge for the death of two construction workers.  The charges stem from the collapse of a crane in New York City. The district attorney determined that the crane owner cut a few corners to reduce its operation costs, significantly sacrificing safety.

    Another example was the 2010 trial of another New York crane operator who was charged with manslaughter. In that case, the criminal charges failed to stick, but an administrative judge found that the contractor used a damaged sling to support the steel collar binding the tower-crane mast to the 18th floor of a high-rise building being constructed. The company also used four slings instead of the eight, as specified by the crane manufacturer; improperly attached the slings and failed to pad or soften them.

    Read the full story…

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


    Builder to Appeal Razing of Harmon Tower

    August 2, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    An attorney for Tutor Perini, George Ogilvie, has said that he will appeal to the state Supreme Court to stop Clark County District Court Judge Elizabeth Gonzalez’s ruling from taking effect. She has given the go-ahead to MGM Resorts and CityCenter to implode the building. Ogilvie described the demolition as “a do-over at Perini’s expense” in protesting Gonzalez’s order. Gonzalez has said that she will instruct jurors that the demolition was an admission that the building was badly built. Ogilvie says this is “allowing MGM to bury its mistakes.”

    MGM claims that it is only following the directive of county safety officials. “When Clark County demanded that CityCenter abate the potential hazard created by faulty construction at the Harmon, we determined that demolition is the surest, safest and fasted way to do so.”

    Read the full story…


    Unfinished Building Projects Litter Miami

    November 18, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Buildings born in ambitious development plans that were never brought to completion form a grim reminder of the building bust in Miami, according to an article in the Miami Herald. One project started in 2007 as a residential project, later there were hopes to develop it as a hotel. These plans are ten months old with no work done.

    Another project was projected as a 30-story office and commercial tower. Four were built before the project was abandoned. The article describes the site as “squalid.” Another project completed the planned 17 stories, but no work has been done beyond constructing the shell. Once planned as luxury condos, the owner owes more than $30,000 in property taxes.

    Each of the three sites profiled in the Miami Herald have become dumping grounds for trash. The building skeletons have also become damaged by the elements. Some abandoned projects have been taken over by homeless people. Businesses near the abandoned properties have been hurt. The buildings also represent failed obligations to subcontractors who have put liens on the properties for work they performed but were never paid for.

    Read the full story…


    Harmon Towers Duty to Defend Question Must Wait, Says Court

    March 1, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Harmon Towers project in Las Vegas was eventually halted short of the planned forty-seven stories after “it was determined that there was substantial defective construction, including defective installation of reinforcing steel throughout the Harmon.” The American Home Insurance Company and Lexington Insurance Company put forth a claim that they had no duty to defend Perini Construction, the builder of the defective Harmon Towers. Further, American Home seeks to recover the monies American reimbursed Perini. The United States District Court of Nevada ruled in the case of American Home Assurance Co. v. Perini Building on February 3, 2012.

    The two insurance companies covered Perini and its subcontractors, Century Steel, Pacific Coast Steel, and Ceco Concrete Construction. Century Steel was the initial subcontractor for the reinforcing steel; they were later acquired by Pacific Coast Steel. In this current case, Perini Construction is the sole defendant.

    Perini sought a dismissal of these claims, arguing that without the subcontractors joined to the case, “the Court cannot afford complete relief among existing parties.” The court rejected this claim, noting that the court can determine the duties of the insurance companies to Perini, which the court described as “separate and distinct from those of the subcontractors.” The subcontractors “have not claimed an interest in the subject matter of the action.” The court concluded that it could determine whether Perini was entitled or not to coverage without affecting the subcontractors. The court rejected Perini’s claim.

    Perini also asked the court to abstain from the case, arguing that it was better heard in a state court. The court noted that several considerations cover whether a case is heard in state or federal courts. The court noted that if the case weighed heavily on state law, the state courts would be the obvious location. Further, if there were a parallel action in the state courts, “there is a presumption that the whole suit should be heard in state courts.” This is, however, no parallel state suit, although the court noted that Perini has “threatened” to do so.

    However, the issue of who is to blame for the problems at Harmon Towers has not been resolved. The court concluded that until the “underlying action” was concluded, it was premature to consider the issues raised in this case while the earlier lawsuit was still in progress. The court denied Perini’s motion to dismiss the case. Given that the outcome of the earlier construction defect case may lead to further litigation in state court, the District Court granted Perini’s motion to abstain, but staying their judgment until the construction defect case is resolved.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Unlicensed Contractors Nabbed in Sting Operation

    September 9, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The California State License Board charged sixteen people in the Fresno area with accepting contracting jobs without licenses. The Statewide Investigative Fraud Team of the CSLB set up a sting operation at a home in Clovis, California seeking bids on tree service, painting, and general contracting services. Those who bid for jobs at more than $500 are required under California law to be licensed. Unlicensed contractors can only work on jobs with a cost to the homeowner of less than $500 and must inform the homeowner that they are not licensed.

    In addition to citing contractors for not possessing appropriate licenses, the CSLB also cited contractors for failure to carry workers compensation insurance and illegal advertising. Further, California law limits down payments to the lesser of ten percent or $1,000. Two contractors were cited for requesting excessive down payments.

    One contractor, an unlicensed tree service contractor, had been cited previously in a sting operation. He failed to show up for his court date.

    Read the full story…


    Contractors Admit Involvement in Kickbacks

    December 9, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Two New Jersey contractors have pleaded guilty to charges that they made false representations for a government contract in a case related to kickbacks for construction work done in two school districts. New Jersey is recommending that the two men, Martin Starr and Stephen Gallagher, will each pay $50,000 in penalties, serve up to a year in jail, and be unable to accept public contracts for five years.

    Last month, another individual in the case, Kenneth Disko, who had been the engineer for the school district, pleaded guilty on a similar charge. In addition to a $50,000 penalty, he will be serving three to five years in prison. A fourth conspirator, Robert Berman, the former business administrator for one of the school districts, has to pay a $13,000 fine and cooperate with the investigation. He is also barred from public employment in New Jersey and has been terminated from his position.

    Starr admitted to preparing fictitious quotes which appeared to be from other contractors in order that his firm would seem to be the lowest bidder. Gallagher helped in preparing the fictitious bids and also provided cash kickbacks to Disko.

    Read the full story…


    Construction Defects Are Occurrences, Says Georgia Supreme Court

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Michael Bradford writes about the implications of a March decision of the Georgia Supreme Court in which the court found that “negligent construction resulting in damage to surrounding property constitutes an occurrence under a commercial general liability policy. The contractor in the case, American Empire Surplus Lines Insurance Co. Inc. vs. Hathaway Development Co. Inc, argued that a damage caused by a plumbing subcontractor’s work was covered. American Empire was the insurer for the plumbing subcontractor.

    Bradford notes that this follows similar decisions in other courts. The George court ruled that “an occurrence can arise where faulty workmanship causes unforeseen or unexpected damage to other property.”

    Read the full story…


    No Coverage For Damage Caused by Chinese Drywall

    October 28, 2011 — Tred Eyerley, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The pollution exclusion barred coverage for alleged property damage and bodily injury in Evanston Ins. Co. v. Harbor Walk Dev., LLC, No. 2:10cv312 (E.D. Va. Sept. 9, 2011).

    Homeowners sued the insured, Harbor Walk, in three lawsuits, alleging the Chinese drywall installed in their homes emitted sulfides and other noxious gases. This caused corrosion and damage to the air-conditioning and ventilation units, refrigeration coils, copper tubing, faucets, metal surfaces, electrical appliances and other personal items. The homeowners also alleged the compounds emitted by the drywall caused bodily injury, such as allergic reactions, headaches, etc.

    Harbor Walk’s insurer, Evanston, filed for a declaratory judgment that the pollution exclusion precluded coverage.

    Read the full story...

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