BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building Taylor County Florida condominiums Taylor County Florida Subterranean parking Taylor County Florida industrial building Taylor County Florida housing Taylor County Florida high-rise construction Taylor County Florida mid-rise construction Taylor County Florida custom home Taylor County Florida landscaping construction Taylor County Florida office building Taylor County Florida parking structure Taylor County Florida production housing Taylor County Florida hospital construction Taylor County Florida Medical building Taylor County Florida condominium Taylor County Florida tract home Taylor County Florida casino resort Taylor County Florida concrete tilt-up Taylor County Florida structural steel construction Taylor County Florida townhome construction Taylor County Florida low-income housing Taylor County Florida retail construction Taylor County Florida
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
     
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Taylor County, Florida

    Florida Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: In Title XXXIII Chapter 558, the Florida Legislature establishes a requirement that homeowners who allege construction defects must first notify the construction professional responsible for the defect and allow them an opportunity to repair the defect before the homeowner canbring suit against the construction professional. The statute, which allows homeowners and associations to file claims against certain types of contractors and others, defines the type of defects that fall under the authority of the legislation and the types of housing covered in thelegislation. Florida sets strict procedures that homeowners must follow in notifying construction professionals of alleged defects. The law also establishes strict timeframes for builders to respond to homeowner claims. Once a builder has inspected the unit, the law allows the builder to offer to repair or settle by paying the owner a sum to cover the cost of repairing the defect. The homeowner has the option of accepting the offer or rejecting the offer and filing suit. Under the statute the courts must abate any homeowner legal action until the homeowner has undertaken the claims process. The law also requires contractors, subcontractors and other covered under the law to notify homeowners of the right to cure process.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Taylor County Florida

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Home Builders Association of Panama City (Fla)
    Local # 1042
    PO Box 979
    Panama City, FL 32402


    Northeast Florida Builders Association
    Local # 1024
    103 Century 21 Dr Ste 100
    Jacksonville, FL 32216
    http://www.nefba.com

    Forgotten Coast Builders Assoc
    Local # 1015
    PO Box 1005
    Port Saint Joe, FL 32457
    http://www.forgottencoastbuilder.com/

    Columbia County Builders Association
    Local # 1007
    PO Box 7353
    Lake City, FL 32055
    http://www.buildcolumbiacounty.com

    Builders Association of North Central FL
    Local # 1020
    2217 NW 66th Ct
    Gainesville, FL 32653
    http://www.bancf.com

    Florida Home Builders Association (State)
    Local # 1000
    PO Box 1259
    Tallahassee, FL 32302
    http://www.fhba.com

    Home Builders Association of West Florida
    Local # 1048
    4400 Bayou Blvd Suite 45
    Pensacola, FL 32503
    http://www.westfloridabuilders.com


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Taylor County Florida

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

    Court Strikes Down Reasonable Construction Defect Settlement

    Builder to Appeal Razing of Harmon Tower

    Environment Decision May Expand Construction Defect Claims

    Housing Market on Way to Recovery

    Minnesota Starts Wide-Ranging Registration of Contractors

    Safer Schools Rendered Unsafe Due to Construction Defects

    Defect Claims as Occurrences? Check Your State Laws

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

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

    Know the Minnesota Statute of Limitations for Construction Defect Claims

    State Audit Questions College Construction Spending in LA

    Continuous Trigger of Coverage Adopted for Loss Under First Party Policy

    San Diego Construction Defect Claim Settled for $2.3 Million

    Ensuing Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

    Architect Not Liable for Balcony’s Collapse

    Kansas Man Caught for Construction Scam in Virginia

    Irene May Benefit Construction Industry

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

    Unfinished Building Projects Litter Miami

    Policing Those Subcontractors: It Might Take Extra Effort To Be An Additional Insured

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

    Contractor’s Home Not Covered for Construction Defects

    Toxic Drywall Not Covered Under Homeowner’s Policy

    Construction Spending Dropped in July

    New Households Moving to Apartments

    Exact Dates Not Needed for Construction Defect Insurance Claim

    Insurance Company Prevails in “Chinese Drywall” Case

    Mortar Insufficient to Insure Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Case

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

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

    Gut Feeling Does Not Disqualify Expert Opinion

    Colorado Court of Appeals Rejects Retroactive Application of C.R.S. § 13-20-808.

    Crane Dangles and So Do Insurance Questions

    Contractor Manslaughter? Safety Shortcuts Are Not Worth It

    Construction Defects: 2010 in Review

    Boston Tower Project to Create 450 Jobs

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

    Construction Delayed by Discovery of Bones

    One Colorado Court Allows Negligence Claim by General Contractor Against Subcontractor

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

    California Bill Would Notify Homeowners on Construction Defect Options

    Eighth Circuit Remands to Determine Applicability of Collapse Exclusion

    More Charges in Las Vegas HOA Construction Defect Scam

    Southern California Lost $8 Billion in Construction Wages

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

    Ohio Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Time to Repair Nevada’s Construction Defect Laws?

    Underpowered AC Not a Construction Defect

    An Upward Trend in Commercial Construction?

    No Coverage For Damage Caused by Chinese Drywall

    Ohio Adopts Energy-Efficient Building Code

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

    Increased Expenditure on Injuries for New York City School Construction

    Limiting Plaintiffs’ Claims to a Cause of Action for Violation of SB-800

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

    Las Vegas Home Builder Still in Bankruptcy

    Subcontractor Not Liable for Defending Contractor in Construction Defect Case

    Local Government Waives Construction Fees to Spur Jobs

    Insurer Rejects Claim on Dolphin Towers

    Faulty Workmanship Exclusion Does Not Bar Coverage

    Repair of Part May Necessitate Replacement of Whole

    Builder Waits too Long to Dispute Contract in Construction Defect Claim

    Loose Bolts Led to Sagging Roof in Construction Defect Claim

    School District Marks End of Construction Project by Hiring Lawyers

    Who Is To Blame For Defective — And Still LEED Certified — Courthouse Square?

    SB800 Cases Approach the Courts

    Arbitration Clause Found Ambiguous in Construction Defect Case

    Negligent Construction an Occurrence Says Ninth Circuit

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

    General Contractors Must Plan to Limit Liability for Subcontractor Injury

    Coverage Rejected Under Owned Property and Alienated Property Exclusions

    Death of Construction Defect Lawyer Ruled a Suicide

    Fire Reveals Defects, Appeals Court Affirms Judgment against Builder

    Construction Defects Leave Animal Shelter Unusable

    Condo Owners Allege Construction Defects

    Badly Constructed Masonry Walls Not an Occurrence in Arkansas Law

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

    Construction Defect Destroys Home, Forty Years Later

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

    Tennessee Court: Window Openings Too Small, Judgment Too Large

    High School Gym Closed by Construction Defects

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

    Court Clarifies Sequence in California’s SB800

    Good and Bad News on Construction Employment

    Five Years of Great Legal Blogging at Insurance Law Hawaii

    Construction Law Client Alert: Hirer Beware - When Exercising Control Over a Job Site’s Safety Conditions, You May be Held Directly Liable for an Independent Contractor’s Injury

    Homeowners Must Comply with Arbitration over Construction Defects

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

    Virginia Chinese Drywall and pollution exclusion
    Corporate Profile

    TAYLOR COUNTY FLORIDA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

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

    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Taylor County, Florida

    Boston Tower Project to Create 450 Jobs

    November 18, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Continuing the development of Boston’s Theater District, Millennium Partners broke ground for the building of Hayward Place, a 15-story residential tower with street-level shops. The project is expected to take two years to complete and will employ about 450 construction workers.

    Thomas Menino, the mayor of Boston said that the “ground breaking of Hayward Place is another sign of economic growth and forward progress on the revitalization of this area.” The project will be built by Suffolk Construction. John Fish, their CEO, said they were “fortunate as a contractor to be the beneficiary of this.”

    The report in the Boston Herald notes that a few blocks away, the site of the former Filenes department store is still “an empty eyesore.” Menino joked, “anyone want to bid for it?” He promised that site would also be developed.

    Read the full story…


    Texas Windstorm Insurance Agency Under Scrutiny

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

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

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

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

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

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


    Insurance for Defective Construction Now in Third Edition

    November 7, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Available both in print and online, the International Risk Management Institute, Inc has brought out a third edition of Insurance for Defective Construction. The work is written by Patrick J. Wielinski of Cokinos, Bosien & Young, a Dallas-Fort Worth law firm. Mr. Wielinski practice focuses on insurance coverage. Insurance for Defective Construction is described as “a must read for anyone who buys, sell, or underwrites construction insurance or who becomes involved in construction claims.”

    Read the full story…


    Condo Buyers Seek to Void Sale over Construction Defect Lawsuit

    November 7, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    A Michigan couple seeks to void their purchase of a condo in Texas after discovering that the complex was undergoing a construction defect lawsuit. ABQ Journal reports that Charles M. Lea and Olga Y. Ziabrikova said that they would not have purchased the condo if they had known the association was already alleging construction defects. The condo association discovered the defects “by at least late 2010,” according to the suit. The couple bought their condo in August 2011 and heard of the defects only in March 2012.

    The couple notes that no one involved with the sale informed them of the construction defect complaints. The community association’s lawsuit states that problems have lead to $2.5 million in damages. The developer, Vegas Verde Condo Partners, have filed a general denial of the construction problems.

    Read the full story…


    Hawaii State Senate Requires CGL Carriers to Submit Premium Information To State Legislature

    March 20, 2011 — March 20, 2011 Construction Defect Journal Staff

    In light of the decision in Hawaii’s Intermediate Court of Appeals in Group Builders, Inc.,v. Admiral Insurance Company, 231 P.3d 67(2010), Hawaii’s state senate is requesting that "every domestic and foreign insurance company that has ever issued commercial general liability policies in the State is requested to submit information to the Legislature on the total premiums received for their commercial general liability policies during the past ten years"

    Read Full Text of Hawaii State Senate Resolution


    The Complete and Accepted Work Doctrine and Construction Defects

    August 16, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Matthew C. Bouchard of Lewis & Roberts PLLC, writes how North Carolina is “bucking the trend” on the “complete and accepted work doctrine.” As he notes, in most states “a contractor can be found liable for personal injuries suffered by third parties from accidents occurring after the contractor’s work is completed and accepted.” But one exception is North Carolina.

    He gives the example of a case, Lamb v. D.S. Duggins Welding, Inc., in which a site superintendent was “injured by the alleged negligence of the project’s steel deck installer, a sub-subcontractor in the contractual chain” “after the sub-sub’s work had been completed and accepted.” The trial court held that the “completed and accepted work doctrine” ended the subcontractor’s liability. The case noted that “employees of the general contractor had modified the installation of the perimeter safety cable in question after the sub-sub had demobilized from the site.”

    Mr. Bouchard notes that “once a project is accepted and turned over, the contractor typically loses control over maintenance of the new facility.” However, he notes that “where the contractor’s work constitutes negligence ?Ķ the doctrine may not apply.” Nor does it end breach of contract claims. It only covers third parties.

    Read the full story…


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

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

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

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

    Read More...


    Subcontractor Not Liable for Defending Contractor in Construction Defect Case

    February 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The California Court of Appeals has ruled on January 9, 2012 in Hensel Phelps Construction Company v. Urata & Sons Cement, upholding the judgment of the lower court.

    Hensel Phelps was the general contractor for a high-rise in Sacramento. They were sued by the owners of the building after problems were discovered in the concrete slabs of the building’s parking garage. Instead of welded steel wire mesh, the slabs had been constructed with fiber mesh. Hensel Phelps filed a cross-complaint against Urata Cement, the subcontractor that had performed the cement work. Urata refused to defend Hensel Phelps. The owners’ case was subsequently dismissed due to the statute of limitations.

    Although the original case was over, Hensel Phelps continued in their claims against Urata. “Urata argued that a handwritten interlineation required Hensel Phelps to prove Urata was at fault for the injury alleged in the building owners’ complaint before Urata was obliged to defend Hensel Phelps in that action.”

    The lower court concluded that Urata would have been obligated to defend Hensel Phelps if the owners’ lawsuit had alleged that the damage was due to the subcontractor’s work or if evidence at trial established this. The lower court found neither of these true. Instead, the use of the fiber mesh was a design issue and “that decision was outside the scope of the subcontractor’s work.”

    During the trial, Hensel Phelps conceded that Urata was not at fault. The appeals court could find no reading of the contract that would cause Urata to be obligated to defend Hensel Phelps, calling Hensel Phelps’s reading of the contact as “grammatically infeasible.”

    Judges Nicholson, Raye, and Butz upheld the decision of the lower court and awarded costs on appeal to Urata.

    Read the court’s decision…


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

    October 23, 2012 — Heidi J. Gassman, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell

    The Colorado Homeowner Protection Act of 2007 (“HPA”), codified at C.R.S. § 13-20-806(7), specifically voids express waivers of, or limitations on, a residential property owner’s ability to enforce any rights, remedies, and damages provided by law in a construction defect case. Practically speaking, this means that limitation of liability provisions in contracts between construction professionals and residential homeowners are void and will not be enforced in Colorado. The HPA can extend even further, however, to subcontractors on residential projects, as seen in a recent District Court ruling.

    The HPA was tested in Thacker v. Gallery Homes, et al., v. Terracon Consultants, Inc., et al., Larimer County District Court Case No. 2007CV1195. Gallery Homes hired Terracon to provide geotechnical and structural engineering services at the Colony Ridge subdivision in Loveland, Colorado. Terracon performed work for Gallery Homes under three separate contracts, each of which included a provision limiting Terracon’s total liability to Gallery Homes.

    After the project was completed, two homeowners filed suit against Gallery Homes for alleged construction defects involving movement of their basement floor systems and foundations and damage to porches, patios, garages, and driveways. Gallery Homes sued Terracon as a third-party defendant, and Terracon sought to enforce its limitation of liability provisions via a partial summary judgment motion.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Heidi J. Gassman, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC. Ms. Gassman can be contacted at gassman@hhmrlaw.com


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

    March 8, 2011 — March 8, 2011, Colorado Construction Litigation

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit recently concluded that the “owned property exclusion” applied to bar coverage for claims of property damage. See Panico v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co., 2011 WL 322830 (10th Cir. 2011). In Panico, the plaintiffs sold property in Aspen, Colorado to the Taylors, who sued the Panicos upon discovering the property was not as represented. After refusing to defend, the Panicos sued State Farm for breach of contract. The district court concluded that the Taylors’ claims were not covered under the Panicos insurance policies and granted summary judgment in State Farm’s favor. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed.

    Mr. Panico built the house on the property as well as several additions to the house. As the Taylors lived in Florida, they primarily relied on their real estate agent and an inspector to ensure the property was acceptable. According to their complaint, the Taylors discovered that the house was “virtually uninhabitable due to serious design and construction defects, mold, rodents, and drainage problems.” Id. at *1. In their complaint, the Taylors asserted three claims for relief against the Panicos based upon misrepresentation and fraudulent concealment about the condition of the property.

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of Heather M. Anderson of Higgins, Hopkins, McClain & Roswell, LLP. Ms Anderson can be contacted at anderson@hhmrlaw.com


    Florida Construction Defect Case Settled for $3 Million

    June 19, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Runaway Beach Club Condominium Association of Kissimmee, Florida has settled its construction defect claims against the parties involved in the construction and development of the buildings. The association claimed that defective roofs and improperly installed windows had lead to leaks and associated damages. A trial date had been set, but parties involved were able to reach this settlement instead.

    Read the full story…


    Insurer Has Duty to Disclose Insured's Interest In Obtaining Written Explanation of Arbitration Award

    October 23, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The issue faced by the Minnesota Supreme Court was whether the insurer had a duty to disclose the insured's interest in obtaining a written explanation of an arbitration award that identified the claims of recovery and the portions of the award attributable to each. Remodeling Dimensions, Inc. v. Integrity Mut. Ins. Co., 2012 LEXIS Minn. 404 (Minn. Sup. Ct., Aug. 22, 2012).

    Remodeling Dimensions, Inc. ("RDI") built an addition for the homeowners and installed windows in the original part of the house. After construction began, the homeowners also asked RDI to fix the master bedroom window in the original part of the house.

    After completion of the project, the house sustained storm damage.

    Read the full story…

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


    The Colorado Court of Appeals Rules that a Statutory Notice of Claim Triggers an Insurer’s Duty to Defend.

    October 23, 2012 — David M. McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell

    Gene and Diane Melssen d/b/a Melssen Construction (“Melssen”) built a custom home for the Holleys, during which period of time Melssen retained a CGL insurance coverage from Auto Owners Insurance Company. Soon after completion of the house, the Holleys noticed cracks in the drywall and, eventually, large cracks developed in the exterior stucco and basement slab. Thereafter, the Holleys contacted Melssen, the structural engineer, an attorney, and Auto-Owners, which assigned a claims adjuster to investigate the claim.

    In April 2008, the Holleys sent Melssen a statutory notice of claim pursuant to C.R.S. § 13-20-803.5 (“NOC”). In this NOC, the Holleys claimed approximately $300,000 in damages related to design and construction defects. The Holleys also provided a list of claimed damages and estimated repairs, accompanied by two reports from the Holleys’ consultant regarding the claimed design and construction defects. In June 2008, Melssen tendered the defense and indemnity of the claim to Auto-Owners. While Auto-Owners did not deny the claim at that time, it did not inspect the property or otherwise adjust the claim. Thereafter, in October 2008, Auto-Owners sent Melssen a letter denying coverage on the basis that the damage occurred outside of the applicable policy period.

    Ultimately, Melssen settled the claims against it for $140,000.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC. Mr. McLain can be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com


    Homeowners Sue Over Sinkholes, Use Cash for Other Things

    January 6, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Quoting one homeowner as saying that his house “can fall in the ground for all I care, I made my money,” the Tampa Bay Times looks at the issue of sinkhole claims in Florida. Homeowners “have paid off mortgages, put in pools, replaced roofs, or otherwise used money from sinkhole claims to do something besides fix sinkhole damage.

    It’s been tough for insurance companies. Citizens Property Insurance took in $32 million in premiums for sinkhole coverage in 2010, but paid out $245 million in sinkhole claims. The Tampa Bay Times notes that some of those claims come from settling problems caused by their repairs, including one settlement of $350,000 for repairs to a house worth $39,000.

    One couple, after receiving $217,000 from Citizens, sold the house to a company that bought unrepaired sinkhole homes for $190,000. The home has been sold since and remains unrepaired.

    Sometimes the preferred solution by the insurance company isn’t the cheapest either. One couple was informed that Citizens was going to spend $150,000 to have the hole filled with grout. After they settled with the insurance company, they fixed the problem by installing steel piers, at a cost of about $45,000.

    Read the full story…


    No Coverage for Construction Defects Under Alabama Law

    June 19, 2012 — Tred Eyerely, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The federal district court determined that under Alabama law, there was no coverage for breach of contract claims arising from alleged construction defects. Owners Ins. Co. v. Shep Jones Constr., Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62085 (N.D. Ala. May 3, 2012).

    The insured entered a contract with the homeowner to remodel her home. After construction was completed, the homeowner sued the insured, alleging damages arising form breach of contract, negligence and negligent supervision.

    The insured had a policy with Owners Insurance Company. Owners Insurance defended under a reservation rights.

    Read the full story…

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


    Williams v. Athletic Field: Hugely Important Lien Case Argued Before Supreme Court

    June 17, 2011 — Douglas Reiser, Builders Counsel

    Well, it finally made it. The most important Washington lien case of recent memory was argued in front of the Washington Supreme Court on Tuesday, June 14, 2011. So, what should we all expect?

    As I was reading through my RSS feeds this afternoon ? I was stopped dead in my tracks. Williams v . Athletic Field, the Division II case that has been a frequent topic here on Builders Counsel, has finally been argued before the Supreme Court. All of you who have been anxiously awaiting this day, you can check out the Supreme Court submissions by following this link.

    The Williams case has been the center of attention for construction lawyers and construction organizations over the past year. Some have called for complete lien law reform, others have tried to patch a hole in the law. Now, we can expect a ruling from the highest court in the state. That ruling will have a major impact on whether the Legislature feels compelled to change lien law.

    Read the full story…

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


    SB800 Cases Approach the Courts

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    California’s Right to Repair Law turns ten this year and cases under the statute are finally coming to trial, as John V. O’Meara of Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara writes for the Martindale-Hubble Legal Library. Mr. O’Meara notes that SB800 eliminated “the traditional definitions of construction defect,” replacing them with “functionality standards.” He argues that these standards are not uniform: “some standards require damage and others do not.” He also wonders what terms like “significant cracks,” “intended water” and “materially comply” mean in a court.

    Mr. O’Meara states that “defendants in construction defect cases have a right to know the standards that apply to a case, the definitions that will be presented to the jury, and the burden of proof that attaches.”

    Read the full story…


    Firm Sued For Construction Defects in Parking Garage

    October 23, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Northhampton County, Pennsylvania is suing a contractor who resurfaced a parking garage in 2009. According to the Express-Times, three years later, the surface is cracked and the county is seeking $700,000 for repairs. Additionally, they have withheld $44,000 of the $2.2 million contract because of the problems. John Stoffa, Northampton County Executive, says that the garage is stable, but not up to safety standards.

    Read the full story…