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

    Unfinished Building Projects Litter Miami

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

    Construction Firm Sues City and Engineers over Reservoir Project

    The Flood Insurance Reform Act May be Extended to 2016

    Preparing for Trial on a Cause of Action for Violation of Civil Code section 895, et seq.

    California Bill Would Notify Homeowners on Construction Defect Options

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

    Five Years of Great Legal Blogging at Insurance Law Hawaii

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

    Florida Contractor on Trial for Bribing School Official

    Florida Property Bill Passes Economic Affairs Committee with Amendments

    AFL-CIO Joins in $10 Billion Infrastructure Plan

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

    Crane Dangles and So Do Insurance Questions

    Harmon Hotel Construction Defect Update

    Residential Construction: Shrinking Now, Growing Later?

    Boyfriend Pleads Guilty in Las Vegas Construction Defect Scam Suicide

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

    Bound by Group Builders, Federal District Court Finds No Occurrence

    Ohio subcontractor work exception to the “your work” exclusion

    Florida “get to” costs do not constitute damages because of “property damage”

    Judge Okays Harmon Tower Demolition, Also Calls for More Testing

    Ensuing Loss Found Ambiguous, Allowing Coverage

    Construction Law Client Alert: California Is One Step Closer to Prohibiting Type I Indemnity Agreements In Private Commercial Projects

    Pipes May Be Defective, But Owners Lack Standing

    MGM Seeks to Demolish Harmon Towers

    Arizona Court of Appeals Decision in $8.475 Million Construction Defect Class Action Suit

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

    Nevada Court Adopts Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    West Coast Casualty Promises Exciting Line Up at the Nineteenth Annual Conference

    Businesspeople to Nevada: Revoke the Construction Defect Laws

    Court Consolidates Cases and Fees in Soil Construction Defect Case

    More Charges in Las Vegas HOA Scandal

    Joinder vs. Misjoinder in Colorado Construction Claims: Roche Constructors v. One Beacon

    Manhattan Developer Breaks Ground on $520 Million Project

    Construction Defect Case Not Over, Despite Summary Judgment

    One World Trade Center Due to Be America’s Tallest and World’s Priciest

    Texas res judicata and co-insurer defense costs contribution

    Firm Sued For Construction Defects in Parking Garage

    Tacoma Construction Site Uncovers Gravestones

    District Court Awards Summary Judgment to Insurance Firm in Framing Case

    Statute of Limitations Upheld in Construction Defect Case

    Court Requires Adherence to “Good Faith and Fair Dealing” in Construction Defect Coverage

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

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

    Appropriation Bill Cuts Military Construction Spending

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

    Court Clarifies Sequence in California’s SB800

    Anti-Assignment Provision Unenforceable in Kentucky

    Amerisure Case to be Heard by Texas Supreme Court

    Window Manufacturer Weathers Recession by Diversifying

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

    Discovery Ordered in Nevada Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Congress Addresses Homebuilding Credit Crunch

    Contractual Liability Exclusion Bars Coverage

    Denver Court Rules that Condo Owners Must Follow Arbitration Agreement

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

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

    Homeowners Must Comply with Arbitration over Construction Defects

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

    Failure to Meet Code Case Remanded to Lower Court for Attorney Fees

    Insurer Able to Refuse Coverage for Failed Retaining Wall

    Coverage Exists Under Ensuing Loss Provision

    Construction Defects Are Occurrences, Says South Carolina High Court

    Foundation Arbitration Doesn’t Preclude Suing Over Cracks

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

    Construction Employment Rises in Half of the States

    Construction Company Head Pleads Guilty to Insurance and Tax Fraud

    No Coverage For Damage Caused by Chinese Drywall

    Architectural Firm Disputes Claim of Fault

    Can Negligent Contractors Shift Blame in South Carolina?

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

    Insurance for Defective Construction Now in Third Edition

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

    Tucson Officials to Discuss Construction Defect Claim

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

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

    Homeowners Sue Over Sinkholes, Use Cash for Other Things

    Underpowered AC Not a Construction Defect

    Insurer Rejects Claim on Dolphin Towers

    Remodels Replace Construction in Redding

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

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

    Irene May Benefit Construction Industry

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

    Important Information Regarding Colorado Mechanic’s Lien Rights.

    Background Owner of Property Cannot Be Compelled to Arbitrate Construction Defects

    Homebuilding on the Rise in Nation’s Capitol

    Construction Bright Spot in Indianapolis

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

    ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 5500 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Anaheim, California Construction Expert Witness Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Anaheim's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Anaheim California forensic architect engineering consultantAnaheim California forensic architect concrete expert witnessAnaheim California forensic architect expert witness structural engineerAnaheim California forensic architect construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessAnaheim California forensic architect consulting engineersAnaheim California forensic architect eifs expert witnessAnaheim California forensic architect defective construction expert
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    Arizona Supreme Court Confirms Eight-Year Limit on Construction Defect Lawsuits

    July 18, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Acting on the case of Albano v. Shea Homes Ltd. Partnership, the Arizona Supreme Court has ruled that Arizona’s eight-year statute of repose applies. The case was referred to the court by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals which had asked for a clarification of Arizona law. The case focused on three questions:

    1. Does the filing of a motion for class certification in an Arizona court toll the statute of limitations for individuals, who are included within the class, to file individual causes of action involving the same defendants and the same subject matter? 2. If so, does this class-action tolling doctrine apply to statutes of repose, and more specifically, to the statute of repose for construction defects set forth in Arizona Revised Statutes ("A.R.S.") § 12-552? 3. If the doctrine applies to statutes of repose, and specifically § 12-552, may a court weigh the equities of the case in determining whether, and to what extent, an action is tolled?

    The litigation at hand has a lengthy history, starting with a case referred to as “Hoffman” in 2003. The Albano plaintiffs were not able to join in Hoffman, and they filed their own lawsuit in 2006. An additional lawsuit was filed by the Albano plaintiffs in 2007. The courts decided that the Albano plaintiffs’ lawsuit was untimely.

    The Arizona Supreme Court concluded that the statute of repose was the appropriate standard for this case. They noted that “the eight-year statute of repose period began to run on November 6, 1997, the date of the Town of Gilbert’s final inspection. Albano II was filed on November 5, 2007.”

    The court found that the plaintiffs had waited too long for start their suit. As a result, they found it unnecessary to answer the first or third questions. Justice A. John Pelander of the Arizona Supreme Court wrote the opinion, dated June 30, 2011.

    Read the court’s decision…


    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…


    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


    Pictorial Construction Terminology Dictionary — A Quick and Helpful Reference

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Does it seem like contractors speak their own language? Construction defect professionals can be hampered by not knowing the terminology. The Bert L. Howe & Associates, Inc. web site has a handy Pictorial Construction Terminology Dictionary in which more than a thousand terms are not only defined, but illustrated with pictures that give a visual component to each definition.

    Whether you’re wondering what a balustrade is, or you need to identify a joist girder, or hundreds of other terms, the Pictorial Construction Terminology Dictionary is there to help you. It can be found at http://www.berthowe.com/bhapedia.php.


    Don MacGregor To Speak at 2011 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar

    January 1, 2011 — February 08, 2011 CDJ Staff

    “Challenges for Experts in Construction Defect Claims and Litigation” will be held Thursday May 13, 2011 between 1:30 and 3:00 PM at this year’s West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar. Among the various topics covered will be of Right to Repair/Opportunity to Repair statutes, improper testing methodologies, new challenges where a case involves a Wrap Policy, OCIPS, CCIPS, and other owner controlled insurance programs, as well as the need for realistic testing protocols for the party the expert is retained to represent.

    During the presentation Mr. MacGregor will be working in connection with a group of construction and design experts each of which have extensive experience with construction defect and claims related litigation. This particular session is expected to attract a standing-room only crowd, drawing in excess of 1700 attendees.

    The West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar is the largest seminar of its type. This year’s event is scheduled for will take place on May 12 and 13, 2011, at The Disneyland Hotel and Resort. For more information regarding the years event please visit http://www.westcoastcasualty.com/dyncat.cfm?catid=3322

    http://www.westcoastcasualty.com/dyncat.cfm?catid=3322

    Demand for Urban Living Leads to Austin Building Boom

    August 16, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The New York Times reports that Austin is undergoing a building boom as a high-tech firms, including Facebook and Google, have moved into the downtown area. With them, comes a need for more apartment buildings and more retail space. Mike Kennedy, the president and chief executive of an Austin real estate firm, told the Times “the office space was here, the housing came, and retail is arriving last to the scene.” Currently, two large projects that will add about 500 apartment units is underway, including a 222-unit, 18-story building, and another that will contain 277 units. Apartment occupancy in Austin is at ninety-seven percent.

    Developers also have hotels and more office space planned. The area has about 6,000 hotel rooms with an additional 2,000 planned, but events in Austin can bring in more people than the city’s 30,000 hotel rooms can accommodate. Office space is eighty-eight percent occupied, and a lack of office space could cause firms to look elsewhere.

    Read the full story…


    Restitution Unlikely in Las Vegas Construction Defect Scam

    October 23, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The San Francisco Chronicle reports that the money lost in the Las Vegas HOA fraud cause is probably not recoverable. Victims of the scam have asked the court for restitution, but Judge Lloyd George doubts any of the money will be found, saying “the money is not available, it would appear.”

    One Vistana board members not part of the conspiracy told reporters that the $8 million construction defect settlement never went for needed repairs. “Within six months that money was gone,” said Bruce Wallace, a retired Air Force colonel. After the construction defect account was depleted to $450,000, two board members disappeared with the funds.

    Read the full story…


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

    August 17, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Reporting on the site VegasInc.com, Liz Benton notes that “nobody wants to take the fall for what happened at Harmon.” Work on the Harmon hotel building in Las Vegas’s CityCenter stopped in 2008 after 26 of the planned 49 stories were completed. Lorence Slutzky, a construction law professor at John Marshall Law School and a partner with the Chicago firm Robbins Schwartz Nicholas Lifton & Taylor told Benton that while inspectors and others are complicit, “the real responsibility rests with Perini, which has an obligation to comply with the plan specifications.” Perini’s claim is that they were given faulty design drawings. MGM disputes this.

    Perini has offered to repair the building defects, however MGM has released a statement that they have “zero confidence or trust that Perini can and will properly fix a building it has so badly constructed thus far.” One MGM spokesperson likened these requests from Perini to “the director of ‘Ishar’ demanding a sequel.” “Ishtar,’ cost Columbia Pictures $55 million dollars and earned only $4.2 million in its initial run. Perini claims that MGM halted work because of the economy.

    Read the full story…


    Homeowners Must Comply with Arbitration over Construction Defects

    January 6, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The California Court of Appeals has upheld a decision by the Superior Court of Kern County that homeowners must comply with arbitration procedures in their construction defect claim. The California Court of Appeals ruled on December 14 in the case of Baeza v. Superior Court of Kern County, denying the plaintiff’s petition that the trial court vacate its order.

    The plaintiffs in the case are homeowners in various developments built by Castle & Cook. The homes were sold with a contract that provided for “nonadversarial prelitigation procedures, including mediation, and judicial reference.” The homeowners made defect claims and argued that Castle & Cooke failed to comply with statutory disclosure requirements and that some of the contracts violate related statutes.

    The appeals court found that there was no ground for appeal of the lower court’s order to continue with prelitigation procedures. The court noted that the plaintiffs could not seek a review of the mediation until a judgment was issued, but that then the issue would be moot. The court felt that there were issues presented that needed clarification, and so they reviewed this case. This was cleared for publication.

    The court considered the intent of the legislature in passing the Right to Repair Act, noting that “under the statutory scheme, the builder has the option of contracting for an alternative nonadversarial prelitigation procedure,” as established in Chapter 4. The court noted that Chapter 4 “contains no specifics regarding what provisions the alternative nonadversarial contractual provisions may or must include.”

    The plaintiffs contended that the builder was in violation of the standards set out in Section 912, however the court responded that these sections set out one set of procedures, but they concluded that “if the Legislature had intended the section 912 disclosure provisions…it could have made the requirements applicable to all builders by locating them in a section outside Chapter 4.”

    Read the court’s decision…


    Construction Suit Ends with Just an Apology

    February 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    After suing a contractor for failing to complete the remodeling of their home, an Orange County couple has settled for an apology. Douglas J. Pettibone represented the contractor, who had lost his business after a broken neck, multiple surgeries, and an addiction to pain medicine. Mr. Pettibone represented his client pro bone. The case was settled in arbitration by JAMS.

    Mr. Pettibone noted that his client gave “a heartfelt and very moving apology.” The remodeling was completed by another contractor, two years after Thorp Construction stopped work on the project. After the apology, the case was dismissed.

    Read the full story…


    Seven Tips to Manage Construction Defect Risk

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Jody T. Wright looks at “seven strategies being used around the country to identify, manage and mitigate your exposures” in a piece in Business Insurance. Wright, Senior VP, Construction Department Manager for Lockton Companies in Denver, gives seven simple steps from the perspective of a insurer.

    His first step is to match your project to your insurance. He suggests keeping the riskier projects separate, noting that from an insurer’s point-of-view, “any project that creates a homeowners association carries a higher potential threat of future litigation.” This leads to his second point: you need to “determine what makes your liability insurer nervous.” In other words, talk with your insurer.

    His third point suggests that builders look back and see if there is a pattern of problems that have lead to payouts from your insurer. Keep your insurer happier by making sure these areas don’t continue to be problems. Nor should you look for new problems. He suggests against leading in new technologies.

    Three more points deal with being careful about with whom you associate. He tells builders to negotiate their contracts, avoiding clauses that would obligate a builder to “indemnify the owner for the negligent work of others that they did not control.” Avoid subcontractors “with loss patterns that might affect your project and reputation.” Builders should identify “owners with a pattern of suing contractors” adding that risk to the cost of the job. They should also identify “the most effective attorneys and expert witnesses” and get them involved before the litigation starts.

    Read the full story…


    Discovery Ordered in Nevada Construction Defect Lawsuit

    August 16, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Gemstone LVS was sued by the Manhattan Homeowners Association in Las Vegas, after which Chartis Specialty Insurance informed Gemstone that they “had no duty to defend or indemnify Gemstone under the Commercial Umbrella Liability Policy.” Gemstone “asserts that at the time the Policy was purchased, it was understood that Chartis would provide insurance coverage for a construction defect lawsuit” and now seeks discovery “to prove Chartis’ bad faith purpose in drafting an illusory Policy.”

    The opinion notes that “the Court conducted a preliminary peek at the pending motion for partial summary judgment and finds that Chartis has not made the strong showing necessary to support the requested stay.” Further, the court notes that “when ambiguity in the language of a policy exists, the court may consider not only the language of the policy but also the ‘intent of the parties, the subject matter of the policy, and the circumstances surrounding its issuance.’” The court concludes that “this type of discovery is relevant to understanding the intent of the parties, more specifically, whether it was understood that Chartis would provide insurance coverage given the construction defect lawsuit.”

    Accordingly, the court denied Chartis’ motion for stay of discovery and established a schedule for discovery, expert designations, rebuttal expert designations, and other matters related to the trial.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Consumer Protection Act Whacks Seattle Roofing Contractor

    July 21, 2011 — Douglas Reiser, Builders Council

    It’s been over 1 year since we last visited the CertainTeed Corp. v. Seattle Roof Brokers lawsuit. After my original post, the contractor, James Garcia, appeared at Builders Counsel in a comment to defend himself. It appears that 1 year later, the court decided to side with CertainTeed and award them significant attorneys’ fees. Ready for the whole story? Its a pricey one.

    Back in July 2010, good friend Mike Atkins (Seattle Trademark Attorney) authored a post about a Seattle roofing contractor who had been sued for false advertising on his website. The lawsuit was raised by CertainTeed, a roofing material producer, whose products were the target of a Seattle contractor’s ire. Seattle Roof Brokers, owned by James Garcia, published content on its website, remarking that CertainTeed products have a history of “premature failure” and that they “will fail?.resale inspection after 15-20 years.”

    CertainTeed filed its action to obtain an injunction and damages under the Consumer Protection Act.

    Read the full story…

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


    No Coverage Under Ensuing Loss Provision

    September 9, 2011 — Tred Eyerley, Construction Law Hawaii

    The cost of removing and replacing cracked flanges to prevent future leakage was not covered as an ensuing loss under a builder’s risk policy in RK Mechanical, Inc. v. Travelers Prop. Casualty Co. of Am., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83958 (D. Colo. Aug. 1, 2011).

    The insured, RK Mechanical Inc., was a subcontractor hired to install plumbing for a residential construction project. RK was an additional insured on the general contractor’s policy with Travelers. RK installed approximately 170 CPVC flanges on the project. Subsequently, two of the flanges cracked, allowing water to overflow and causing water damage to the project. Travelers was notified of the flange failure and resulting water damage.

    RK subsequently removed and replaced the two cracked flanges and began water remediation. Travelers paid for the cost of the water damage due to the cracked flanges.

    RK then examined all of the flanges installed in the project and discovered many were cracked and/or showed signs of potential failure. RK removed and replaced the cracked flanges. RK tendered a claim and demand for indemnity to Travelers for these repair costs. Travelers denied the claim. RK then sued for breach of contract and declaratory relief. The parties filed cross motions for summary judgment.

    Read the full story…

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


    After $15 Million Settlement, Association Gets $7.7 Million From Additional Subcontractor

    November 7, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The stucco subcontractor for a condominium complex did not join in with the other defendants in a settlement of more than $15 million, preferring to take the case to a jury trial. That jury has found the stucco installer liable for $7.7 million to make repairs. Mark Wiechnik of Herrick Feinstein LLP wrote about the case on the Lexology web site. Mr. Wiechnik notes that the jury was shown “samples of rotted wood taken from the property as well as numerous pictures of damage resulting from the various defects.”

    Read the full story…


    Ohio Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    March 28, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Construction Law Hawaii

    Charles and Valerie Myers hired Perry Miller to build their home. Myers v. United Ohio Ins. Co., 2012 Ohio App. LEXIS 287 (Ohio Ct. App. Jan. 26, 2012). After completion of the home, Miller was again hired to construct an addition which included a full basement, staircases, bathroom, bedroom, hallway and garage.

    After the addition was completed, one of the basement walls began to crack and bow. Miller began to make repairs, but eventually stopped working on the project. Other contractors were hired to make repairs, but further problems developed. A second basement wall began to bow and crack, allowing water into the basement. The wall eventually had to be replaced. Subsequently, the roof over the addition began to leak in five or six places before the drywall could be painted. The leaks caused water stains on the drywall and caused it to separate and tear. It was discovered the roof needed to be replaced.

    The Myers sued Miller and his insurer, United Ohio Insurance Company. The trial court ruled that the policy did not provide coverage for faulty workmanship, but did provide coverage for consequential damages caused by repeated exposure to the elements. United Ohio conceded liability in the amount of $2,000 to repair water damage to the drywall. United Ohio was also found liable for $51,576, which included $31,000 to repair the roof and ceiling and $18,576 to replace the basement wall.

    Read the full story…

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


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

    May 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

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

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

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

    The insurer filed for declaratory relief in federal district court.

    Read the full story…


    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…