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

    Arkansas Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: SB975: Requires that residential contractors be given notice and an opportunity to repair. Homeowners must provide 20 days notice in writing to builder prior to legal action to address defect and/or repair


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Pangburn Arkansas

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Cleburne County Home Builders Association
    Local # 0405
    PO Box 1325
    Heber Springs, AR 72543


    Greater Fort Smith Associated Home Builders
    Local # 0436
    5111 Rogers Ave Ste 531
    Fort Smith, AR 72903
    http://www.greaterfortsmithhomebuilders.com

    White County Home Builders Association
    Local # 0472
    PO Box 1501
    Searcy, AR 72143


    Crittenden County Home Builders Association
    Local # 0415
    PO Box 2204
    West Memphis, AR 72303


    Home Builders Association of Faulkner County
    Local # 0439
    PO Box 1228
    Conway, AR 72033
    http://www.faulknercountyhomebuilders.com

    NE Arkansas Home Builders Association
    Local # 0432
    PO Box 17237
    Jonesboro, AR 72403
    http://www.neahba.org

    Cabot Area Home Builders Association
    Local # 0420
    PO Box 1291
    Cabot, AR 72023
    http://www.cabotareahba.com


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Pangburn Arkansas

    Sometimes It’s Okay to Destroy Evidence

    Illinois Court Determines Insurer Must Defend Negligent Misrepresentation Claim

    Ohio Adopts Energy-Efficient Building Code

    Record-Setting Construction in Fargo

    New Construction Laws, New Forms in California

    Washington Court Limits Lien Rights of Construction Managers

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

    Water Drainage Case Lacks Standing

    FHA Lists Bridges and Overpasses that May Have Defective Grout

    Louisiana Politicians Struggle on Construction Bills, Hospital Redevelopment

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

    Legislatures Shouldn’t Try to Do the Courts’ Job

    Tennessee Court: Window Openings Too Small, Judgment Too Large

    Ensuing Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

    A Downside of Associational Standing - HOA's Claims Against Subcontractors Barred by Statute of Limitations

    Good Signs for Housing Market in 2013

    Kansas Man Caught for Construction Scam in Virginia

    Arizona Homeowners Must Give Notice of Construction Defect Claims

    Amerisure Case to be Heard by Texas Supreme Court

    New Safety Standards Issued by ASSE and ANSI

    Avoid Gaps in Construction Defect Coverage

    Contract Not So Clear in South Carolina Construction Defect Case

    Homeowner Has No Grounds to Avoid Mechanics Lien

    A Lien Might Just Save Your Small Construction Business

    Congress Addresses Homebuilding Credit Crunch

    Construction Defects Are Occurrences, Says Georgia Supreme Court

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

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

    Construction Suit Ends with Just an Apology

    Insurers Reacting to Massachusetts Tornadoes

    Defective Shingle Claims Valid Despite Bankruptcy

    Judge Okays Harmon Tower Demolition, Also Calls for More Testing

    No Coverage for Negligent Misrepresentation without Allegations of “Bodily Injury” or “Property Damage”

    New OSHA Fall Rules to Start Early in Minnesota

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

    Residential Construction: Shrinking Now, Growing Later?

    New Buildings in California Soon Must Be Greener

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

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Construction Defect Claims

    Nebraska Man Sentenced for Insurance Fraud in Construction Projects

    Court Clarifies Sequence in California’s SB800

    No Resulting Loss From Deck Collapsing Due to Rot

    San Diego Construction Defect Claim Settled for $2.3 Million

    Homeowners Sue Over Sinkholes, Use Cash for Other Things

    California Supreme Court Finds Associations Bound by Member Arbitration Clauses

    Tampa Condo Owners Allege Defects

    Good and Bad News on Construction Employment

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

    Plaintiff Not Entitled to Further Damages over Defective Decking

    Court Orders House to be Demolished or Relocated

    Damage During Roof Repairs Account for Three Occurrences

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Despite Construction Defects

    Negligent Construction an Occurrence Says Ninth Circuit

    Houses Can Still Make Cents: Illinois’ Implied Warranty of Habitability

    Tenth Circuit Finds Insurer Must Defend Unintentional Faulty Workmanship

    Arbitration Clause Found Ambiguous in Construction Defect Case

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

    Construction Law Alert: A Specialty License May Not Be Required If Work Covered By Another License

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

    Flooded Courtroom May be Due to Construction Defect

    Battle of “Other Insurance” Clauses

    Plans Go High Tech

    Destruction of Construction Defect Evidence Leads to Sanctions against Plaintiff

    Pipes May Be Defective, But Owners Lack Standing

    Couple Sues Attorney over Construction Defect Case, Loses

    Boyfriend Pleads Guilty in Las Vegas Construction Defect Scam Suicide

    California Supreme Court to Examine Arbitration Provisions in Several Upcoming Cases

    Building Boom Leads to Construction Defect Cases

    Appeals Court Reverses Summary Judgment over Defective Archway Construction

    Defective Grout May Cause Trouble for Bridges

    “Other Insurance” and Indemnity Provisions Determine Which Insurer Must Cover

    Judge Kobayashi Determines No Coverage for Construction Defect Claim

    Federal District Court Predicts Florida Will Adopt Injury In Fact Trigger

    Nevada Assembly Sends Construction Defect Bill to Senate

    Harmon Hotel Construction Defect Update

    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

    Yellow Brass Fittings Play a Crucial Role in Baker v Castle & Cooke Homes

    Hovnanian Increases Construction Defect Reserves for 2012

    South Carolina Contractors Regain General Liability Coverage

    Ensuing Losses From Faulty Workmanship Must be Covered

    Contractor Burns Down Home, Insurer Refuses Coverage

    Architect Not Liable for Balcony’s Collapse

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

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

    Water Is the Enemy

    Court Sends Construction Defect Case from Kansas to Missouri

    District Court Awards Summary Judgment to Insurance Firm in Framing Case

    Retaining Wall Contractor Not Responsible for Building Damage

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

    Construction Defect Bill Introduced in California
    Corporate Profile

    PANGBURN ARKANSAS CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Pangburn, Arkansas 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
    Pangburn, Arkansas

    Nevada Construction Defect Lawyers Dead in Possible Suicides

    March 28, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    A number of news sources have reported on the recent death of Nevada construction defect attorney, Nancy Quon. Ms. Quon was implicated in a recent scandal in which a group conspired to control homeowner associations in order to divert construction defect lawsuits to the members of the conspiracy.

    Ms. Quon was found dead in her bathtub. The details are still under investigations. She and her boyfriend were accused of a failed arson/suicide scheme in 2010. Ms. Quon survived an attempt to burn down her home. Subsequently, her boyfriend obtained some gamma-hydroxybutyric acid (GBH) for her, as part of another failed suicide attempt.

    Subsequent to Ms. Quon’s death, David Amesbury was found in California dead by hanging. Mr. Amesbury took a plea deal in the case, and he had admitted his role in providing legal and construction contracts to firms in the conspiracy. He was accused of fixing HOA elections.

    Read the full story…

    Read the full story…

    Read the full story…

    Read the full story…


    Contractor Burns Down Home, Insurer Refuses Coverage

    May 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    InsuranceStep reports that a Connecticut insurance company has rejected a claim over a fire in a remodeling project that killed five people. Utica First Insurance states that the coverage was invalid as the insured, Tiberias Construction, had misrepresented information about the company and the work performed in applying for insurance. During a remodel, the contractor allegedly placed fireplace ashes near trash. The trash ignited, leading to the house fire.

    Read the full story…


    Damage During Roof Repairs Account for Three Occurrences

    August 2, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    Southgate Gardens Condominium had buildings damaged by Hurricane Wilma in 2005. See Mid-Continent Cas. Co. v. Basedeo, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 11864 (11th Cir. June 12, 2012). First State Development Corporation was hired by Southgate to do repairs.

    On November 1, 2005, First State completed tarping on the buildings. Thereafter, on November 11, 2005, First State contracted with Southgate to remove and replace the roofs of the Southgate Buildings.

    The tarps placed by First State were inadequate and allowed water to enter the unit of Wayne Basdeo and cause damage. Further, when it attached the tarps, First State caused holes to be made in the roofs of buildings, leading to additional damage. First State also left open the mansards (a type of roof which has two slopes on all all sides, but with the lower slope steeper that the upper one). Finally, the peeled-back condition of the roofing allowed rain to enter.

    Basdeo filed a claim with Mid-Continent.

    Read the full story…

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


    Contractor Manslaughter? Safety Shortcuts Are Not Worth It

    August 11, 2011 — Douglas Reiser, Builders Counsel

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

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

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

    Read the full story…

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


    Continuous Trigger of Coverage Adopted for Loss Under First Party Policy

    August 2, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The Seventh Circuit predicted that the Wisconsin Supreme Court would adopt the continuous injury trigger for first party property loss that extends over several policy periods. Miller v. Safeco Ins. Co. of Am., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 12940 (7th Cir. June 25, 2012).

    A home inspection report performed before the Millers purchased their home showed a soft spot on the roof. The stucco's finish color was also uneven and stained. Further, some water damage was found in the study and skylights above the kitchen sink. But the report advised that the exterior walls, chimney, grass roof, flashings, floor joists/beams and columns, garage walls and floor appeared serviceable. A roof specialist determined the soft spot was not significant and could be repaired for $1,500.

    The Millers purchased a homeowner's policy from Safeco on June 30, 2005. The policy went into effect the next day when the Millers closed on the property. But the Millers did not see the policy's terms until Safeco mailed them a copy of the policy at the end of July.

    Before receiving the policy, the Millers discovered severe inner wall water leaks and significant water infiltration on three of the home's exterior walls.

    Read the full story…

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


    Court Clarifies Sequence in California’s SB800

    December 20, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    As California’s Right-To-Repair law, SB800, nears its ninth birthday, it has remained “largely untested in the legal system” as noted by Megan MacNee of Wood, Smith, Henning & Berman LLP on the site RealEstateRama. She writes that some homeowners have requested documents prior to filing a claim, which she describes as an attempt to “game the system,” and “analogous to requiring a party to litigation to comply with discovery before a complaint is filed.”

    The court determined that homeowners may not request documents from the builder until they have actually filed a claim. The court noted that SB800 lacks any clear indication that homeowners may request documents before filing a claim (and also does not indicate that a builder would have to provide documents in these circumstances). The court concluded that the section that sets up the prelitigation procedures occurs before they section on documents discovery.¬? “Because the document request is part of the prelitigation procedure, and the prelitigation procedure does not begin until the homeowner has served notice of a claim, it follows that there can be no prelitigation obligation to produce documents under section 912, subdivision (a) unless the homeowner has commenced the prelitigation procedure by serving notice of a claim.”

    Read the full story…


    Ensuing Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

    December 9, 2011 — Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    Water intrusion caused by a construction defect was not covered under the all risk policy’s ensuing loss provision. See Friedberg v. Chubb & Son, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123582 (D. Minn. Oct. 25, 2011).

    Extensive water damage was discovered in the insureds’ home when a small hole in the exterior wall was being repaired. Chubb’s adjuster and an expert found water intrusion causing rot, mold, and damage to the home’s wood framing and insulation. Chubb denied coverage because water intruded through the roof and wall, resulting in gradual deterioration. The insureds filed suit.

    The policy excluded coverage for construction defects, but insured "ensuing covered loss unless another exclusion applies."

    The court agreed there was a prima facie case for coverage because the home suffered a physical loss.

    Read the full story…

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


    Another Guilty Plea in Las Vegas HOA Scandal

    December 20, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    A twenty-eighth person has plead guilty in the ongoing Las Vegas HOA scandal. Dax Louderman, who had been a construction company manager had acknowledged that he stole more than $495,000 from his former employers, Alpha 1 Construction and the Stone Canyon Homeowners Association, and further that he did not report this improper income on his tax returns. He has agreed to work with prosecutors and to pay $134,860 to the IRS. His actual sentencing will happen on June 24.

    Read the full story…


    Georgia Law: “An Occurrence Can Arise Where Faulty Workmanship Causes Unforeseen or Unexpected Damage to Other Property”

    March 5, 2011 — By CDCoverage.com, March 5, 2011

    In American Empire Surplus Lines Ins. Co. v. Hathaway Development Co., Inc., No. S10G0521 (Ga. March 7, 2011), insured plumbing subcontractor Whisnant was sued by general contractor Hathaway seeking damages for costs incurred by Hathaway in repairing damage to property other than Whisnant’s plumbing work resulting from Whisnant’s negligently performed plumbing work on three separate projects. On one project, Whisnant installed a pipe smaller

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com


    Exclusions Bar Coverage for Damage Caused by Chinese Drywall

    July 5, 2011 — Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The insured homeowners were unsuccessful in arguing around the policy's exclusions when seeking coverage for damage caused by Chinese drywall. Ross v. C. Adams. Constr. & Design, L.L.C., 2011 La. App. LEXIS 769 (La. Ct. App. June 14, 2011).

    Before the insureds purchased and moved into their home, it was renovated. After moving in, the insures discovered foreign gypsum drywall, or Chinese drywall. The insureds submitted a claim to Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Company. In an investigation, the insurer confirmed the presence of Chinese drywall and damage to the metal surfaces caused by corrosion. Louisiana Citizens refused coverage and the insureds sued. The trial court denied the insured's motion for summary judgment and granted summary judgment to Louisiana Citizens.

    The court of appeal affirmed. Initially, the court determined the insureds sustained a direct physical loss. The inherent qualities of the Chinese drywall created a physical loss to the home and required that the drywall be removed and replaced.

    Four exclusions, however, barred coverage. First, damages due to faulty or defective materials were excluded from coverage. The Chinese drywall emitted high levels of sulfuric gas which caused the damage to the insured's plumbing, electrical wiring and metal components.

    Read the full story…

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


    Equipment Costs? It’s a Steal!

    July 8, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    KCBD reports on the problems of a Lubbock, Texas contractor. It’s hard to do the job when your tools keep getting stolen. Corey Meadows, owner of Top Cut Interiors, told KCBD that he had chained an air compressor to a table saw. Since the thieves couldn’t cut the chain, they cut the table saw “and just took the air compressor and the chain.” Meadows estimates the thieves cost him $2,000 in damaged or stolen equipment and time lost.

    Read the full story…


    Are Construction Defects Covered by Your General Liability Policy?

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Construction firms are finding that their insurers are denying construction defect claims and the courts are siding with the insurers, according to Kelly M. Gindele, writing in the Martindale-Hubble Legal Library. Ms. Gindele notes that when construction defect claims are not covered, firms can end up with “multi-million dollar claims” that it has to pay “out of its own pocket.” She notes that in Kentucky and Ohio, if “the insured’s work causes an unforeseen and unintended event to occur?Ķthere is not occurrence under the policy.” Further, if there is an occurrence, the court will “look for an exception to coverage.”

    She also notes that contractors may not hold sufficient coverage, either by limiting the amounts or the time. She notes that while “insurers generally try to limit coverage for defect claims to one year,” that “construction defects may not be found in a year’s time.”

    Ms. Ginele recommends that contractors “hire an insurance company with extensive experience in this field” and “independent legal counsel with insurance knowledge,” to avoid finding themselves “with limited or even no coverage when it needs it most.”

    Read the full story…


    Ceiling Collapse Attributed to Construction Defect

    May 19, 2011 — May 16, 2011 - CDJ Staff

    WSMV, Nashville reports that the ceiling collapse in a Franklin, Tennessee Kohl’s was attributed to a construction defect by fire officials. The officials noted that the ceiling was renovated at the time. No injuries were reported.

    The report notes that “inspectors were supposed to look at the renovations next week, but fire officials said that will have to be delayed until another time.”

    Read the full story…


    Washington Supreme Court Sides with Lien Claimants in Williams v. Athletic Field

    September 30, 2011 — Douglas Reiser, Builders Counsel

    The Washington Supreme Court issued their opinion today on Williams v. Athletic Field, perhaps the most talked about construction law case in the past few years. I have discussed this case exhaustively here on Builders Counsel. Today we have a resolution.

    In an unanimous opinion issued today, the high court sided with lien filers who followed a sample form provided in RCW 60.04.091. Additionally, the court found that a lien company - and presumably other persons - could sign the lien for the lien claimant, as an agent, without invalidating the lien.

    Read the full story…

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


    Home Repair Firms Sued for Fraud

    September 30, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The Illinois Attorney General has filed a lawsuit in Cook County Circuit Court alleging that two connected firms took money from homeowners and then failed to perform the contracted work. One of the three defendants, Chris Bidigare, was an owner of agent of both Fairway Construction and Maintenance Services, LLC, and Rock Construction Management, LLC.

    In once case, according to the article on the OakPark Patch, one homeowner provided a $111,000 down payment, only to have the company cancel the job and refuse to return the money. One homeowner was told by Fairway that she should contact their insurance provider. The insurance provider told her that Fairway’s insurance had been cancelled due to non-payment.

    The suit seeks to bar the three defendants from working in home repair in Illinois.

    Read the full story…


    Tennessee Court: Window Openings Too Small, Judgment Too Large

    November 18, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The Tennessee Court of Appeals has issued a ruling in the case of Dayton v. Ackerman, upholding the decision of the lower court, even as they found that the award was incorrectly computed. The Daytons purchased a house that had been designed and built by the Ackermans, who operated a construction business. The court noted that the warranty with the house promised that “for a period of 60 days, the following items will be free of defects in materials or workmanship: doors (including hardware); windows; electric switches; receptacles; and fixtures; caulking around exterior openings; pluming fixtures; and cabinet work.”

    Soon, the Daytons began to experience problems with the house. Many were addressed by the Ackermans, but the Daytons continued to have problems with the windows. Neither side could specify a firm date when the Ackermans were contacted by the Daytons about the window problems. The Ackermans maintained that more than two years passed before the Daytons complained about the windows. The lower court found the Daytons more credible in this.

    Initially, the Daytons included the window manufacturer in their suit, but after preliminary investigations, the Daytons dropped Martin Doors from their suit. Martin Doors concluded that the windows were improperly installed, many of them “jammed into openings that were too small for them.”

    After the Daytons dismissed Martin Doors, the Ackermans sought to file a third party complaint against them. This was denied by the court, as too much time had elapsed. The Ackermans also noted that not all of the window installations were defective, however, the courts found that the Daytons ought not to have mismatched windows.

    Unfortunately for the Daytons, the window repair was done incorrectly and the windows were now too small for the openings. The firm that did the repair discounted the windows and Daytons concealed the problem with plantation shutters, totalling $400 less than the original lowest estimate. However, the appeals court noted that it was here that the trial court made their computation error. Correcting this, the appeals court assessed the Ackermans $12,016.20 instead of $13,016.20.

    Finally, the Ackerman’s expert was excluded as he had changed his testimony between deposition and trial. The trial reviewed the expert’s testimony and had it been admissible, it would not have changed the ruling.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Insurer Must Cover Construction Defects Claims under Actual Injury Rule

    March 1, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The Texas Court of Appeals held that the insured need not prove the exact dates physical damage occurred in order to trigger defense and indemnity coverage. Vines-Herrin Custom Homes, LLC v. Great Am. Lloyds Ins. Co., 2011 Tex. App. LEXIS 10027 (Tex. Ct. App. Dec. 21, 2011).

    In 1999, the insured built a home. He was insured under a CGL policy issued by Great American from November 9, 1998 to November 9, 2000. Thereafter, the insured held a CGL policy issued by Mid-Continent from November 9, 2000 to September 18, 2002.

    After construction was completed, the insured sold the house to the buyer in May 2000. After moving in, the buyer found numerous construction defects in the home, including water entering cracks in the home, and sinking and sagging of parts of the house. The buyer sued the insured, who sought coverage under the two policies. When the insurers refused to defend the underlying suit, the insured sued for a declaratory judgment.

    The underlying case went to arbitration and an award of $2.4 million was granted to the buyer. The insured assigned to the buyer his claims against the insurers.

    Read the full story…

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


    Nevada Assembly Sends Construction Defect Bill to Senate

    June 6, 2011 — CDJ Staff

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

    Read the full story…