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

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

    Seven Tips to Manage Construction Defect Risk

    Injured Construction Worker Settles for Five Hundred Thousand

    Excess Carrier Successfully Appeals Primary Insurer’s Summary Judgment Award

    Reference to "Man Made" Movement of Earth Corrects Ambiguity

    No Coverage for Construction Defects Under Alabama Law

    Public Relations Battle over Harmon Tower

    Battle of “Other Insurance” Clauses

    Defect Claims as Occurrences? Check Your State Laws

    Guilty Pleas Draw Renewed Interest In Nevada’s Construction Defect Laws

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

    California insured’s duty to cooperate and insurer’s right to select defense counsel

    Construction Bright Spot in Indianapolis

    Late Filing Contractor Barred from Involving Subcontractors in Construction Defect Claim

    Hovnanian Sees Second-Quarter Profit, Points to Recovery

    Construction Spending Dropped in July

    South Carolina “occurrence” and allocation

    Fifth Circuit Asks Texas Supreme Court to Clarify Construction Defect Decision

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

    DA’s Office Checking Workers Comp Compliance

    Contractor Sues License Board

    Architect Not Liable for Balcony’s Collapse

    Insurers Reacting to Massachusetts Tornadoes

    Ohio Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Boston’s Tunnel Project Plagued by Water

    Construction Upturn in Silicon Valley

    LEED Certified Courthouse Square Negotiating With Insurers, Mulling Over Demolition

    District Court Awards Summary Judgment to Insurance Firm in Framing Case

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

    Continuous Trigger of Coverage Adopted for Loss Under First Party Policy

    Ensuing Loss Found Ambiguous, Allowing Coverage

    Insurance Firm Defends against $22 Million Claim

    Arizona Court of Appeals Rules Issues Were Not Covered in Construction Defect Suit

    Construction Defect Not Occurrences, Says Hawaii Court

    Windows and Lawsuits Fly at W Hotel

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

    School District Marks End of Construction Project by Hiring Lawyers

    Harmon Tower Construction Defects Update: Who’s To Blame?

    Building Inspector Jailed for Taking Bribes

    FHA Lists Bridges and Overpasses that May Have Defective Grout

    Builder to Appeal Razing of Harmon Tower

    Exact Dates Not Needed for Construction Defect Insurance Claim

    Hilton Grand Vacations Defect Trial Delayed

    Irene May Benefit Construction Industry

    Know the Minnesota Statute of Limitations for Construction Defect Claims

    Architect Not Responsible for Injuries to Guests

    Avoid Gaps in Construction Defect Coverage

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

    Builder Cannot Receive Setoff in Construction Defect Case

    Australian Developer Denies Building Problems Due to Construction Defects

    Liability policy covers negligent construction: GA high court

    California Bill Would Notify Homeowners on Construction Defect Options

    Court Sends Construction Defect Case from Kansas to Missouri

    Court Strikes Down Reasonable Construction Defect Settlement

    Ensuing Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

    MGM Seeks to Demolish Harmon Towers

    Ceiling Collapse Attributed to Construction Defect

    After Construction Defect Case, Repairs to Austin Building

    United States District Court Confirms That Insurers Can Be Held Liable Under The CCPA.

    Harmon Towers Duty to Defend Question Must Wait, Says Court

    Construction Delayed by Discovery of Bones

    South Carolina Contractors Regain General Liability Coverage

    Delays in Filing Lead to Dismissal in Moisture Intrusion Lawsuit

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

    Texas Windstorm Insurance Agency Under Scrutiny

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

    Judge Concludes Drywall Manufacturer Sold in Florida

    Construction Defects Leave Animal Shelter Unusable

    Construction Defect Journal Seeks Article Submissions Regarding SB800 and Other Builders Right to Repair Laws

    Construction Firm Sues City and Engineers over Reservoir Project

    Colorado Court of Appeals Finds Damages to Non-Defective Property Arising From Defective Construction Covered Under Commercial General Liability Policy

    Will They Blow It Up?

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

    Homeowners Not Compelled to Arbitration in Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Contractor’s Home Not Covered for Construction Defects

    Insurer Must Defend Claims for Diminution in Value of Damaged Property

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

    Underpowered AC Not a Construction Defect

    Construction Defect Litigation at San Diego’s Alicante Condominiums?

    Construction Suit Ends with Just an Apology

    Window Manufacturer Weathers Recession by Diversifying

    Tucson Officials to Discuss Construction Defect Claim

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

    Boston Tower Project to Create 450 Jobs

    BUILD Act Inching Closer To Reality

    Although Property Damage Arises From An Occurrence, Coverage Barred By Business Risk Exclusions

    Another Colorado District Court Refuses to Apply HB 10-1394 Retroactively

    Former New York Governor to Head Construction Monitoring Firm

    Texas Court of Appeals Conditionally Grant Petition for Writ of Mandamus to Anderson

    Tacoma Construction Site Uncovers Gravestones
    Corporate Profile

    ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

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

    Anaheim California forensic architect consulting general contractorAnaheim California forensic architect roofing and waterproofing expert witnessAnaheim California forensic architect contractor expert witnessAnaheim California forensic architect building code expert witnessAnaheim California forensic architect building consultant expertAnaheim California forensic architect architecture expert witnessAnaheim California forensic architect construction defect expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    Webinar on Insurance Disputes in Construction Defects

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Seth Lamden, of the firm Neal Gerber Eisenberg will be presenting a webinar on “Insurance Coverage Disputes in Construction Defects” on July 17, 2012 at 1 p.m. EDT. Mr. Lamden’s presentation will focus on “handling both the construction and insurance components of construction defect claims.” He will be discussing recent case law and new insurance products. The presentation will present information on evaluating various types of insurance policies, explaining common issues, contract requirement, and the economic loss doctrine. Mr. Lamden will advise attendees on how to avoid getting into a construction defect case. He will conclude his presentation with a brief question-and-answer session.

    Read the full story…


    Architect Not Liable for Balcony’s Collapse

    September 13, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Texas Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from a woman who was partially paralyzed due to the collapse of a balcony. She had sued the architect of her friends’ home, but the Texas Third Circuit Court of Appeals had reversed a jury ruling against the architect, Sinclair Black. Black’s firm, Black + Vernooy, had designed the home and had supervised “administration of the construction contract.” Despite a contractual obligation to “endeavor to guard the owner against defects and deficiencies,” the balcony builder had not followed the architect’s specifications, including in the construction of the balcony.

    While the jury found Black liable for ten percent of the blame, Black argued that he could not be held liable for the contractor’s negligence, nor did he have any duty to third parties.

    Read the full story…


    California Posts Nation’s Largest Gain in Construction Jobs

    March 28, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    California added about 8,900 construction jobs in January, 2012, as compared to December, 2011, leading the nation in the number of added construction jobs. Thirty-four other states also saw added construction jobs. A year prior, only twenty-eight states added construction jobs. The Associated General Contractors of America analyzed the monthly report from the Labor Department. Ken Simonson, the chief economist for the Associated General Contractors of America noted that “the gains this January partly reflect very mild weather this winter and exceptionally cold and snowy conditions a year before.”

    Read the full story…


    Connecticut Gets Medieval All Over Construction Defects

    February 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Hartford Courant reports that Connecticut is trying a very old tactic in a construction defect suit. The law library building at the University of Connecticut suffered from leaks which have now been repaired. The state waited twelve years after was complete to file lawsuit, despite that Connecticut has a six-year statute of limitations on construction defect claims. Connecticut claims that the statute of limitations does apply to the state.

    The state is arguing that a legal principle from the thirteenth century allows it to go along with its suit. As befits a medieval part of common law, the principle is called “nullum tempus occurrit regi,” or “time does not run against the king.” In 1874, the American Law Register said that nullum tempus occurrit reipublicae “has been adopted in every one of the United States” and “is now firmly established law.”

    In the case of Connecticut, Connecticut Solicitor General Gregory D’Auria said that “the statute of limitations does not apply to the state.” He also noted that “the state did not ‘wait’ to file the lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed only after all other options and remedies were exhausted.”

    Connecticut also argued that “nullus tempus occurrit regi” applied in another construction defect case at the York Correctional Institution. The judge in that case ruled in December 2008 to let the case proceed. But in the library case, Judge William T. Cremins ruled in February 2009 that the statute of limitations should apply to the state as well. Both cases have been appealed, with the library case moving more quickly toward the Connecticut Supreme Court.

    Read the full story…


    Injured Construction Worker Settles for Five Hundred Thousand

    October 28, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    An upstate New York man who was injured when an unsecured truss fell off the railings of a scissor lift has settled for $500,000. As the accident happened at the building site for a casino for the Seneca Nation, attorneys for the construction firm had argued that New York labor laws were inapplicable as the injury happened on Seneca Nation land. The state appeals court ruled that as none of the parties involved were Native Americans, it was not internal to the affairs of the Seneca Nation.

    Read the full story...


    AFL-CIO Joins in $10 Billion Infrastructure Plan

    June 30, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The AFL-CIO has announced plans to generate up to $10 billion in funding for infrastructure development, training construction workers, and making buildings more energy efficient, pledging $20 million to retrofit buildings. Bloomberg News reports that union officials made the announcement in Chicago at the Clinton Global Initiative, releasing a statement from Richard Trumka, president of the union, “we, at the AFL-CIO, believe that together, with our partners in business and government, we can profitably invest significant resources to make America more competitive and energy efficient.” A foot injury prevented Mr. Trumka from attending the event.

    The statement also quoted Mark Ayers, president of the Building and Construction Trades Department of the AFL-CIO, “the time is now to become intensely focused on the creation of jobs.”

    Read the full story…


    New OSHA Fall Rules to Start Early in Minnesota

    June 14, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Minnesota has elected to implement the new OSHA rules concerning fall prevention in residential construction on June 20, well before OSHA’s September 15 deadline. Brian Johnson, reporting in Finance and Commerce, quotes Pam Perri, the executive vice president of the Builders Association of Minnesota, “this is the worst time to implement a new rule.” Ms. Perri notes “In Minnesota, education time for the residential construction industry is between November and March 1, not in the middle of the construction season.”

    Mike Swanson of Rottlund Homes estimated that the new regulations would add between $200 to $500 to the cost of a house and that he felt the current safety regulations were adequate. OSHA officials are quoted that there continues “to be a high number of fall-related deaths in construction.”

    Read the fully story…


    School District Settles Construction Lawsuit

    November 7, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Franklin County, Pennsylvania Public Opinion reports that an area school is coming to an end with its construction lawsuit. The school district was sued by its contractors for a combined $1.4 million, which the school district withheld when the project was not completed on schedule. Lobar Inc. claimed that the district additionally owed interest and should pay attorney fees. The school claimed that only $1.15 million was due under the contract. Under the settlement, they will be paying $1.136 million.

    Read the full story…


    Statutes of Limitations May be the Colorado Contractors’ Friend

    April 18, 2011 — April 18, 2011 Beverley BevenFlorez - Construction Defect Journal

    Albert Wolf, a principal in Wolf Slatkin & Madison P. C., has written an interesting article on statutes of limitations in construction defect claims in Colorado. While Wolf states that in most cases, “construction defect claims against construction industry participants (contractors, subcontractors, architects, engineers, etc.) requires that suits be started within two years after construction defects have been or should have been—in the exercise of reasonable diligence (care)—discovered,” if a project used the AIA General Conditions (AIA Document A2010) before the 2007 edition, the “statutes of limitations begin to run (accrue) at either substantial completion or breach by the contractor (installation of defective work), depending on the circumstances.”

    “That’s a huge difference,” Wolf writes in his article. “For example, if the structural defect caused by faulty foundation work is not discovered or discoverable until walls begin to exhibit cracking more than two years after the building is completed, the owner’s claim against the contractor may be barred if the AIA provision is applied.”

    Read the full story...


    Nevada Budget Remains at Impasse over Construction Defect Law

    June 1, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Negotiations for the Nevada state budget have stalled over proposals to amend the state’s construction defect laws. Assembly Republicans had offered changes to the law to make it friendlier to contractors; however, after a state Supreme Court ruling that the state could not move a local government entity’s funds into state coffers, pressure has increased on the governor to lift the expiration dates of taxes approved in 2009.

    The Reno Gazette-Journal quotes John Madole, a construction industry lobbyist, “We agree with them that you have to address the issue of the attorney fees, and for all practical purposes, they are automatically awarded when anybody brings any kind of suit.”

    Speaker of the Assembly, John Oceguera, a Democrat, has proposed a bill that “makes it absolutely crystal clear that the only time you get attorney's fees is if you're the prevailing party.”

    Read the full story…


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

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

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

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

    Read the full story…

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


    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.


    $5 Million Construction Defect Lawsuit over Oregon Townhomes

    January 6, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    A homeowners’ association in Lake Oswego, Oregon has filed a $5 million lawsuit against the developers of the luxury townhomes. The homeowners of Sunset Crossing are suing Centurion Homes and Aspen Townhomes over claims that construction defects have lead to water intrusion and structural damages. The townhomes were built in 2005.

    Andy Burns, the lawyer for Phillip and Patricia Gentelmann, the owners of both Centurion Homes and Aspen Townhomes, said the Gentelmanns were “taking these allegations very seriously.” The suit says that the construction violated state and local building codes and that the firms did not repair damage caused by water intrusion.

    Read the full story…


    2011 Worst Year Ever for Home Sales

    September 9, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    So few new single-family homes have sold in 2011 that expectations are that this will be the worst year for new homes sales since the Commerce Department started tracking this in 1963. The Harford Courant notes that previously builders created a new supply to which was added homes under foreclosure.

    Ed Leamer, economist and director of UCLA’s Anderson Forecast, says that recovery would be driven by two sectors, manufacturing and construction. “It doesn’t look like there is going to be a big recovery in manufacturing,” he says. “It is going to have to come in housing.”

    The soft housing market, however, is leading to a loss of construction jobs, as reported by the Associated General Contractors of America. As a result, stock prices for the twelve largest publicly-traded home builders have declined 22.7 percent in a market that has declined 4.2 percent overall.

    Read the full story…


    Good and Bad News on Construction Employment

    February 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The construction industry hit a two-year high in January, with 21,000 jobs added that month. The mild winter is assumed to have helped. According to the General Contractors of America, the construction industry currently employs about 5.57 million people. This is a 21 percent gain over January 2010. Ken Simonson, the chief economist of GCA, noted that “the unemployment rate in construction is still double that of the overall economy.” He said it was not currently clear if “the recent job growth reflects a sustained pickup or merely acceleration of homebuilding and highway projects that normally halt when the ground freezes in December and January.”

    Stephen Sandherr, the chief executive officer of the GCA, said that the federal government had to make infrastructure funding a top priority. “Without adequate long-term funding for infrastructure, competitive tax rates and fewer costly regulatory hurdles, the construction industry may lose some of the jobs it gained in the last year.”

    Read the full story…


    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.


    Southern California Lost $8 Billion in Construction Wages

    August 17, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Los Angeles and Orange Counties are first on a list no area wants to be on. According to the Sacramento Bee, reporting on data from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, LA and Orange Counties saw an $8 billion drop in construction wages in 2010, as compared to 2006. In 2006, the region saw payrolls of $26.8 billion, but in 2010, that was reduced to $18.5 billion.

    This was not the largest percentage change. Of the metropolitan areas with the largest declines in construction earnings, Las Vegas saw a $3.6 billion drop, however that represented half of their 2006 totals of $7.2 billion. Conversely, a $3.3 billion drop in the New York area represented only 10% of what had been $33.8 billion in payroll in 2006.

    Read the full story…


    Toxic Drywall Not Covered Under Homeowner’s Policy

    March 28, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Duphuys of Baton Rouge Louisiana found themselves needing to argue both sides of an issue, according to the judge in Duphuy v. USAA Casualty Insurance Company. The Duphuys alleged that the drywall in their home “emits odorous gases that cause damage to air-condition and refrigerator coils, copper tubing, electrical wiring, computer wiring, and other household items.” Additionally, they reported damage to “their home’s insulation, trimwork, floors, cabinets, carpets, and other items” which they maintained were “covered under the ‘ensuing loss’ portion of their policy.”

    Their insurer declined coverage, stating that the damages were not a “direct, physical loss,” and even if they were “four different exclusions independently exclude coverage, even if such loss occurred.” The policy excludes defective building materials, latent defects, pollutants, and corrosion damage. The court noted that “ambiguities in policy exclusions are construed to afford coverage to the insured.”

    The court did determine that the Duphuys were not in “a situation where the plaintiffs caused the risk for which they now seek coverage.” The judge cited an earlier case, In re Chinese Drywall, “a case with substantially similar facts and construing the same policy” and in that case, “property damage” was determined to “include the loss of use of tangible property.” The court’s conclusion was that the Duphuys “suffered a direct, physical loss triggering coverage under their policy.”

    Unfortunately for the Duphuys, at this point the judge noted that while they had a “direct, physical loss,” the exclusions put them “in the tough predicament of claiming the drywall is neither defective nor its off-gassing corrosive or a pollutant, but nonetheless damage-causing.”

    In the earlier Chinese Drywall case, the judge found that “faulty and defective materials” “constitutes a physical thing tainted by imperfection or impairment.” The case “found the drywall served its intended purpose as a room divider and insulator but nonetheless qualified under the exclusion, analogizing the drywall to building components containing asbestos that courts have previously determined fit under the same exclusion.” In the current case, the judge concluded that the drywall was “outside the realm of coverage under the policy.”

    The court also found that it had to apply the corrosion exclusion, noting that the plaintiffs tried to evade this by stating, “simplistically and somewhat disingenuously, that the damage is not caused by corrosion but by the drywall itself.” The plaintiffs are, however, parties to another Chinese drywall case, Payton v. Knauf Gips KG, in which “they directly alleged that ‘sulfides and other noxious gases, such as those emitted from [Chinese] drywall, cause corrosion and damage to personal property.’” As the court pointed out, the Duphuys could not claim in one case that the corrosion was caused by gases emitted by the drywall and in another claim it was the drywall itself. “They hope their more ambiguous allegations will be resolved in their favor and unlock the doors to discovery.”

    The court quickly noted that “the remaining damage allegations are too vague and conclusory to construe” and permitted “exploration of the latent defect and pollution exclusions.”

    The judge concluded that the plaintiffs did not provide sufficient facts to establish coverage under the ensuing loss provision, stating that the “plaintiffs must allege, at the very least, how the drywall causes damage to the trimwork, carpet, etc., not simply that it does so.” Given the court’s determinations in the case, the plaintiffs’ motion was dismissed.

    Read the court’s decision…