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

    Washington Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: (SB 5536) The legislature passed a contractor protection bill that reduces contractors' exposure to lawsuits to six years from 12, and gives builders seven "affirmative defenses" to counter defect complaints from homeowners. Claimant must provide notice no later than 45 days before filing action; within 21 days of notice of claim, "construction professional" must serve response; claimant must accept or reject inspection proposal or settlement offer within 30 days; within 14 days following inspection, construction pro must serve written offer to remedy/compromise/settle; claimant can reject all offers; statutes of limitations are tolled until 60 days after period of time during which filing of action is barred under section 3 of the act. This law applies to single-family dwellings and condos.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Klickitat County Washington

    A license is required for plumbing, and electrical trades. Businesses must register with the Secretary of State.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Building Industry Association of Clark County
    Local # 4908
    103 E 29th St
    Vancouver, WA 98663
    http://www.biaofclarkcounty.org

    Lower Columbia Contr Assoc
    Local # 4922
    PO Box 2306
    Longview, WA 98632
    http://www.lcca.net

    Home Builders Association of Tri-Cities
    Local # 4911
    10001 W Clearwater Ave
    Kennewick, WA 99336
    http://www.hbatc.com

    Lewis-Clark Home Builders Association
    Local # 1310
    1313 6TH ST
    CLARKSTON, WA 99403
    http://www.lcbca.qwestoffice.net

    Central Washington Home Builders Association
    Local # 4909
    3301 W Nob Hill Blvd
    Yakima, WA 98902
    http://www.cwhba.org

    Building Industry Association of Washington-State
    Local # 4900
    111 W 21st Avenue
    Olympia, WA 98501
    http://www.biaw.com

    Olympia Master Builders
    Local # 4933
    1211 State Ave NE
    Olympia, WA 98506
    http://www.omb.org


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Klickitat County Washington

    El Paso Increases Surety Bond Requirement on Contractors

    Bar to Raise on Green Standard

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

    Defense for Additional Insured Not Barred By Sole Negligence Provision

    Nevada Assembly Bill Proposes Changes to Construction Defect Litigation

    Builder Waits too Long to Dispute Contract in Construction Defect Claim

    Going Green for Lower Permit Fees

    Know the Minnesota Statute of Limitations for Construction Defect Claims

    Condominium Communities Must Complete Construction Defect Repairs, Says FHA

    Partial Settlement in DeKalb Construction Management Case

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Bars Coverage for Landslide and Water Leak

    Ensuing Losses From Faulty Workmanship Must be Covered

    Eleventh Circuit Asks Georgia Supreme Court if Construction Defects Are Caused by an "Occurrence"

    Arbitrator May Use Own Discretion in Consolidating Construction Defect Cases

    Faulty Workmanship Exclusion Does Not Bar Coverage

    Contract Not So Clear in South Carolina Construction Defect Case

    Insurer Must Cover Construction Defects Claims under Actual Injury Rule

    Godfather Charged with Insurance Fraud

    Hovnanian Increases Construction Defect Reserves for 2012

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

    Hovnanian Sees Second-Quarter Profit, Points to Recovery

    Contractor Convicted of Additional Fraud

    Contractor Sues License Board

    Cleveland Condo Board Says Construction Defects Caused Leaks

    South Carolina Law Clarifies Statue of Repose

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

    Preventing Costly Litigation Through Your Construction Contract

    Construction Defect Case Not Over, Despite Summary Judgment

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

    No Choice between Homeowner Protection and Bankrupt Developers?

    Nevada Supreme Court Reverses Decision against Grader in Drainage Case

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

    Construction Defects Are Occurrences, Says Georgia Supreme Court

    Bound by Group Builders, Federal District Court Finds No Occurrence

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

    Ensuing Loss Found Ambiguous, Allowing Coverage

    OSHA Extends Delay of Residential Construction Fall Protection Requirements

    The Hidden Dangers of Construction Defect Litigation

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

    Remodels Replace Construction in Redding

    Nevada Budget Remains at Impasse over Construction Defect Law

    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

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend in Water Intrusion Case

    Contractor Sues Supplier over Defective Products

    Architect Not Responsible for Injuries to Guests

    Unfinished Building Projects Litter Miami

    Court Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Construction Defect Suit

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

    Five Years of Great Legal Blogging at Insurance Law Hawaii

    Court Clarifies Sequence in California’s SB800

    SB800 Cases Approach the Courts

    Florida trigger

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

    Delays in Filing Lead to Dismissal in Moisture Intrusion Lawsuit

    Green Buildings Could Lead to Liabilities

    Seller Cannot Compel Arbitration for Its Role in Construction Defect Case<

    Court Orders House to be Demolished or Relocated

    Flooded Courtroom May be Due to Construction Defect

    South Carolina “occurrence” and allocation

    Home Sales Still Low, But Enough to Spur Homebuilders

    Florida Property Bill Passes Economic Affairs Committee with Amendments

    Contractor Removed from Site for Lack of Insurance

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

    Washington Court Limits Lien Rights of Construction Managers

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

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

    Negligent Construction an Occurrence Says Ninth Circuit

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

    Construction Defects Not Occurrences under Ohio Law

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

    South Carolina Contractors Regain General Liability Coverage

    Construction Workers Face Dangers on the Job

    Damron Agreement Questioned in Colorado Casualty Insurance v Safety Control Company, et al.

    Insurer Able to Refuse Coverage for Failed Retaining Wall

    Court Consolidates Cases and Fees in Soil Construction Defect Case

    State Audit Questions College Construction Spending in LA

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

    Massachusetts Couple Seek to Recuse Judge in Construction Defect Case

    Arbitration Clause Not Binding on Association in Construction Defect Claim

    Tampa Condo Owners Allege Defects

    Vegas Hi-Rise Not Earthquake Safe

    Sometimes It’s Okay to Destroy Evidence

    Southern California Lost $8 Billion in Construction Wages

    Florida Contractor on Trial for Bribing School Official

    Avoid Gaps in Construction Defect Coverage

    Condominium Exclusion Bars Coverage for Construction Defect

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

    Construction Defects Are Occurrences, Says South Carolina High Court

    Boston’s Tunnel Project Plagued by Water
    Corporate Profile

    KLICKITAT COUNTY WASHINGTON CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Klickitat County, Washington 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
    Klickitat County, Washington

    Insurers Reacting to Massachusetts Tornadoes

    August 11, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The Patriot-Ledger reports that insurers could pay out as much as $200 million to cover homes damaged or destroyed in the tornadoes that hit central and southern Massachusetts in June, 2011. Joseph Murphy, Commissioner of the State Division of Insurance didn?t foresee problems with insurers covering these claims. “At this point, there doesn’t seem to be any one company overexposed in that area,” he told the Patriot-Ledger.

    Insurance executives did not think the tornadoes would cause them to raise rates. Steve Chevalier, CEO of NLC Companies, said, “it’s a major event for those impacted by it, but it’s not close to a financial hit to us.”

    One insurer noted that the winter weather generated more claims; however the cumulative value of those claims was $15 million.

    Read the full story…


    Harmon Hotel Construction Defect Update

    July 18, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Coverage of the ongoing litigation concerning the Harmon Hotel continues to proliferate. Architectural Record and a number of other news outlets continue to provide additional details and coverage of the matter. Chief among the conditions alleged are improperly installed reinforcing steel inside link beams on 15 floors. MGM Claims that the conditions amount to hundreds of millions of dollars in damages, while Perini (the builder) indicated in a July 12th statement that the buildings problems are related to the design, and the they are “fixable.”

    There is significant speculation that MGM Resorts International isn’t interested in repairing the hotel due to a glut of hotel rooms attendant to the troubled economy. In a statement Tuesday Perini reportedly stated that “Repairing and opening the Harmon would only create a greater glut of unused hotel rooms for MGM,” “If market conditions were better and MGM found that demand existed for the Harmon hotel rooms, MGM would not be claiming that the Harmon is unstable.”

    MGM asserts that Perini failed to ”properly construct” the project. Clark County’s Department of Development Services has reportedly asked MGM to provide a plan to fix the project by August 15th.

    The Harmon is part of the $8.5 billion CityCenter project that opened in the fourth quarter of 2009 and is jointly owned by MGM Resorts and Dubai World.

    Prior reports indicated that the owner (MGM) had considered razing the entire project. The future of the project remains uncertain.


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

    March 7, 2011 — By Steve Cvitanovic of Haight Brown & Bonesteel, LLP.

    Contractors should always be sure that they understand the licensing in any Subcontract or Prime Contract before entering into any agreement. However, on March 3, 2011, in the case of Pacific Casson & Shoring, Inc. v. Bernards Bros., Inc. 2011 Cal.App.Lexis 236, the Court of Appeal determined that if a specialty license is subsumed within another license, the specialty license may not be required.

    Bernards entered into a subcontract with Pacific to excavate, backfill, grade and provide geotechnical design parameters for a hospital. The Prime Contract required the bidder to maintain a Class C-12 specialty earthwork license. However, Pacific only held a Class A general engineering license which it turns out was suspended during the performance of the work. Pacific sued Bernards for nonpayment of $544,567, but the lawsuit was dismissed because the trial court found that Pacific (1) lacked a C-12 license, and (2) Pacific’s Class A license was suspended for failure to pay an unrelated judgment. Pacific was also ordered to disgorge $206,437 in prior payments.

    The Court of Appeal reversed and remanded. The Court of Appeal agreed with Pacific and held that a C-12 specialty license was not required despite the Prime Contract. The Court of Appeal found that the C-12 specialty license would have been “superfluous” since it was fully encompassed within the Class A requirements. However, the Court of Appeal also remanded the case for further

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of Steve Cvitanovic of Haight Brown & Bonesteel, LLP.


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

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

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

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

    Read the full story…

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


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

    May 24, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Judge Patricia J. Cottrell, ruling on the case Roger Wilkes, et al. v. Shaw Enterprises, LLC, in the Tennessee Court of Appeals, upheld the trial court’s conclusion that “the builder constructed the house in accordance with good building practices even though it was not in strict conformance with the building code.” However, Judge Cottrell directed the lower court to “award to Appellants reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred in their first appeal, as determined by the trial court.”

    Judge Cottrell cited in her opinion the contract which specified that the house would be constructed “in accordance with good building practices.” However, after the Wilkes discovered water leakage, the inspections revealed that “that Shaw had not installed through-wall flashing and weep holes when the house was built.” The trial court concluded that:

    “Separate and apart from the flashing and weep holes, the trial court concluded the Wilkeses were entitled to recover damages for the other defects they proved based on the cost of repair estimates introduced during the first and second trials, which the court adjusted for credibility reasons. Thus, the trial court recalculated the amount the Wilkeses were entitled to recover and concluded they were entitled to $17,721 for the value of repairs for defects in violation of good business practices, and an additional 15%, or $2,658.15, for management, overhead, and profit of a licensed contractor. This resulted in a judgment in the amount of $20,370.15. The trial court awarded the Wilkeses attorneys” fees through the Page 9 first trial in the amount of $5,094.78 and discretionary costs in the amount of $1,500. The total judgment following the second trial totaled $26,973.93.”

    In this second appeal, Judge Cottrell concluded, that “the trial court thus did not have the authority to decide the Wilkeses were not entitled to their attorneys” fees and costs incurred in the first appeal.”

    Read the court’s decision


    Partial Settlement in DeKalb Construction Management Case

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The DeKalb County School District has made a partial settlement in a lawsuit over their claims of mismanagement of construction projects. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports that the school board settled with E. R. Mitchell & Co., the smaller of two firms that they have sued. As part of the settlement, Mitchell will be testifying against their former partner. Claims from the other side of the lawsuit are that the school board improperly fired the Heery/Mitchell partnership. The superintendant who fired the company, Crawford Lewis, and his chief operations office, Pat Reid, have since been charged with criminal conspiracy to defraud the construction program. A lawyer for Heery said that “we believe that when presented to a jury, Heery will be vindicated.”

    Read the full story…


    Connecticut Gets Medieval All Over Construction Defects

    February 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

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

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

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

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

    Read the full story…


    Florida Law: Defects in Infrastructure Improvements Not Covered in Home Construction Warranties

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    In April 2012, Governor Rick Scott signed into law House Bill 1013, despite lobbying from homeowner and condominium associations among others. The law was in response to a case in which the court had found that implied warranties covered external subdivision improvements. Prior to the court decision, these were not thought to be covered.

    According to an article in the Martindale-Hubble Legal Library, under the new law, road and drainage improvements will not be included implied warranty of a new home. The law took effect on July 1.

    Read the full story…


    California Posts Nation’s Largest Gain in Construction Jobs

    March 28, 2012 — CDJ Staff

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

    Read the full story…


    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


    New Households Moving to Apartments

    December 20, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The New York Times reports that multifamily construction?Äîapartment buildings?Äîis leading the recovery in construction. Construction of single-family homes is only a third of the way up from its fall from its earlier heights, while multifamily construction has recovered two-thirds of its peak. Young adults are moving out of their parents’ homes, but instead of buying homes, they’re renting apartments.

    Houston is adding thousands of new units, leading to a fear of overbuilding. Rents have been rising, but as the supply of apartment units rises, higher rents may be unsustainable. However, during the recession, young adults did not move out of their parents’ homes, leading to about two million doubled-up households. David Crowe, the chief economist of the National Association of Home Builders, noted that “all of the net addition to households since 2004 has been in rentals.”

    Read the full story…


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

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

    Recently, the Supreme Court of Georgia reversed the decision in American Empire Surplus Lines Insurance Company v Hathaway Development Company, Inc. stating that because Whisnant’s faulty workmanship caused damage to the surrounding properties, the construction defects constituted “occurrences” under the Commercial General Liability (CGL) policy. Unlike the South Carolina Supreme court ruling in the case of Crossman Communities v Harleysville Mutual, the Georgia Supreme Court stated that an accident can happen intentionally if the effect is not the intended result.

    Interestingly, the only dissenting judge, J. Melton, disagreed with his colleagues on the basis that “although the term ‘accident’ is not specifically defined in the policy, it is axiomatic that an ‘accident’ cannot result from ‘intentional’ behavior.” It is clear that what constitutes an occurrence in CGL policies is still being hotly debated.

    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…


    Battle of “Other Insurance” Clauses

    March 23, 2011 — Tred R. Eyerly - Insurance Law Hawaii - March 23, 2011

    The New York Court of Appeals considered the impact of competing “other insurance” provisions located in both a CGL policy and a D&O policy. See Fieldston Property Owners Assoc., Inc. v. Hermitage Ins. Co., Inv., 2011 N.Y. LEXIS 254 (N.Y. Feb. 24, 2011).

    In the underlying case, Fieldston’s officers were charged with making false statements and fraudulent claims with respect to a customer's right to access its property from adjacent streets. Suit was eventually filed against Fieldston and its officers, alleging several causes of action including injurious falsehood. Damages were sought.

    Fieldston’s CGL policy was issued by Hermitage. The “other insurance” provision stated, “If other valid and collectible insurance is available to the insured for a loss we cover . . . our obligations are limited,” but also stated it would share with all other insurance as a primary policy.

    Read the full story...

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


    Unfinished Building Projects Litter Miami

    November 18, 2011 — CDJ Staff

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

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

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

    Read the full story…


    Application of Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine Supports Coverage

    January 6, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    Relying on the efficient proximate cause doctrine, the court determined coverage potentially existed for damage caused by water. Union Sav. Bank v. Allstate Indem. Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 134398 (S.D. Ind. Nov. 21, 2011).

    The Tods purchased property that was mortgaged by Union Savings. The Tods obtained a Landlords Policy for the property from Allstate. When the Tods were in default on their loan, Union Savings notified them that foreclosure proceedings would commence. Union Savings sent an appraiser to the property who discovered water in the basement. Water and electricity to the building were off. Union Savings notified Allstate and later filed a formal claim under the mortgagee clause in the Landlords Policy. This clause stated, "A covered loss will be payable to the mortgagees named on the policy declaration. . . ."

    Allstate denied coverage, citing exclusions for water damage.

    Read the full story…

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


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

    April 27, 2011 — April 27, 2011, by CDCoverage.com

    In Markel American Ins. Co. v. Lennar Corp., No. 14-10-00008-CV (Tex. Ct. App. April 19, 2011), insured homebuilder Lennar filed suit against its insurer Markel seeking recovery of costs incurred by Lennar to repair water damage to homes resulting from defective EIFS siding. Following a jury trial, judgment was entered in favor of Lennar and against Markel. On appeal, the intermediate appellate court reversed. Applying Texas law, the court first held that Lennar failed to satisfy its burden of allocating damages between covered and uncovered. In a prior decision, the court had held that, while the costs incurred by Lennar for the repair of the resulting water damage

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com


    Judge Okays Harmon Tower Demolition, Also Calls for More Testing

    August 2, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Vegas.Inc reports that Clark County District Court Judge Elizabeth Gonzalez has permitted the demolition the tower, which MGM Resorts has claimed is a safety hazard. Perini Building Co. claims that the building does not need to be demolished. CityCenter claims that repairing the building would take nearly a year longer than a demolition and cost about $200 million. Further, CityCenter assumes that the building’s reputation would cost it another $30 million.

    Subsequently, Judge Gonzalez ruled that the pattern of destructive testing would not support a claim that there were an estimated 1,400 defective items in the building. An attorney for CityCenter, Steve Morris, has suggested that they may seek more testing, impossible to do once the building is demolished. CityCenter issued a statement that “nearly every time CityCenter has chipped away concrete to review structural work at the Harmon, we have found defects.” They describe the building as “unusable.”

    Tutor Perini contends that it “remains confident that it will prevail when the issues of safety, reparability and responsibility for the issues facing the Harmon tower are considered.

    Read the full story…