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

    Virginia Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: (HB558; H 150; §55-70.1) Warranty extension applicable to single-family but not HOAs: in addition to any other express or implied warranties; It requires registered or certified mail notice to "vendor" stating nature of claim; reasonable time not to exceed six months to "cure the defect".


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Isle Of Wight County Virginia

    A contractor's license is required for all trades. Separate boards license plumbing, electrical, HVAC, gas fitting, and asbestos trades.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Peninsula Housing & Builders Association
    Local # 4844
    760 McGuire Pl
    Newport News, VA 23601
    http://peninsulahousing.org/

    Home Builders Association of Southside VA
    Local # 4863
    10300 Corporate Road
    Petersburg, VA 23805
    http://www.hbaofsouthside.com

    New River Valley Home Builders Association
    Local # 4837
    PO Box 2010
    Christiansburg, VA 24068
    http://www.nrvhba.com

    Tidewater Builders Association
    Local # 4854
    2117 Smith Ave
    Chesapeake, VA 23320
    http://www.tbaonline.org

    Roanoke Regional Home Builders Association
    Local # 4881
    1626 Apperson Dr
    Salem, VA 24153
    http://www.rrhba.com

    Home Builders Association of Central VA
    Local # 4827
    20334 Timberlake Rd Ste 3
    Lynchburg, VA 24502
    http://www.HBACV.org

    Builders & Associates of Southern VA
    Local # 4829
    PO Box 10178 Ste 28
    Danville, VA 24543



    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Isle Of Wight County Virginia

    Amerisure Case to be Heard by Texas Supreme Court

    Is Construction Heading Off the Fiscal Cliff?

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

    General Contractors Must Plan to Limit Liability for Subcontractor Injury

    Avoid Gaps in Construction Defect Coverage

    Utah Construction Defect Claims Dependant on Contracts

    Appeals Court Upholds Decision by Referee in Trial Court for Antagan v Shea Homes

    Fire Reveals Defects, Appeals Court Affirms Judgment against Builder

    One to Watch: Case Takes on Economic Loss Rule and Professional Duties

    Insurance Firm Defends against $22 Million Claim

    Harmon Hotel Construction Defect Update

    Surveyors Statute Trumps Construction Defect Claim in Tennessee

    Plans Go High Tech

    BHA Expands Construction Experts Group

    Construction on the Rise in Denver

    Ambitious Building Plans in Boston

    Texas res judicata and co-insurer defense costs contribution

    Construction Upturn in Silicon Valley

    California Supreme Court Binds Homeowner Associations To Arbitration Provisions In CC&Rs

    Tampa Condo Owners Allege Defects

    Save A Legal Fee? Sometimes You Better Talk With Your Construction Attorney

    Contractor’s Home Not Covered for Construction Defects

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

    FHA Lists Bridges and Overpasses that May Have Defective Grout

    Nevada Budget Remains at Impasse over Construction Defect Law

    Tennessee Court: Window Openings Too Small, Judgment Too Large

    Construction Defect Bill Introduced in California

    Certificate of Merit to Sue Architects or Engineers Bill Proposed

    Gut Feeling Does Not Disqualify Expert Opinion

    Exact Dates Not Needed for Construction Defect Insurance Claim

    Insurer Settles on Construction Defect Claim

    Another Las Vegas Tower at the Center of Construction Defect Claims

    Town Files Construction Lawsuit over Dust

    Official Tried to Influence Judge against Shortchanged Subcontractor

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

    Texas “your work” exclusion

    Preparing For the Worst with Smart Books & Records

    Des Moines Home Builders Building for Habitat for Humanity

    Construction Defects in Home a Breach of Contract

    Orange County Home Builder Dead at 93

    Residential Construction Down in San Diego

    Construction Defects and Contractor-Owners

    California Supreme Court Finds Associations Bound by Member Arbitration Clauses

    Lower Court “Eminently Reasonable” but Wrong in Construction Defect Case

    Contractor Manslaughter? Safety Shortcuts Are Not Worth It

    Bar to Raise on Green Standard

    In Colorado, Repair Vendors Can Bring First-Party Bad Faith Actions For Amounts Owed From an Insurer

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

    LEED Certified Courthouse Square Negotiating With Insurers, Mulling Over Demolition

    Unlicensed Contractors Nabbed in Sting Operation

    Virginia Chinese Drywall and pollution exclusion

    Delays in Filing Lead to Dismissal in Moisture Intrusion Lawsuit

    Foundation Arbitration Doesn’t Preclude Suing Over Cracks

    The King of Construction Defect Scams

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

    Construction Defect Notice in the Mailbox? Respond Appropriately

    Good and Bad News on Construction Employment

    Construction Bright Spot in Indianapolis

    Federal Judge Dismisses Insurance Coverage Lawsuit In Construction Defect Case

    The Flood Insurance Reform Act May be Extended to 2016

    Hawaii Building Codes to Stay in State Control

    Florida County Suspends Impact Fees to Spur Development

    Granting Stay, Federal Court Reviews Construction Defect Coverage in Hawaii

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

    Faulty Workmanship Exclusion Does Not Bar Coverage

    Policyholder Fails to Build Adequate Record to Support Bad Faith Claim

    El Paso Increases Surety Bond Requirement on Contractors

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

    Another Guilty Plea In Nevada Construction Defect Fraud Case

    Construction Defect Journal Marks First Anniversary

    Geometrically Defined Drainage Cavities in EIFS as a Guard Against Defects

    California Assembly Bill Proposes an End to Ten Year Statute of Repose

    Insurance Policy Provides No Coverage For Slab Collapse in Vision One

    Construction Defect Not a RICO Case, Says Court

    Tenth Circuit Finds Insurer Must Defend Unintentional Faulty Workmanship

    Defense for Additional Insured Not Barred By Sole Negligence Provision

    Environment Decision May Expand Construction Defect Claims

    Construction Workers Unearth Bones

    West Hollywood Building: Historic Building May Be Defective

    Irene May Benefit Construction Industry

    Harmon Towers Duty to Defend Question Must Wait, Says Court

    Nevada Senate Rejects Construction Defect Bill

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

    Insurer Able to Refuse Coverage for Failed Retaining Wall

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

    Continuous Trigger of Coverage Adopted for Loss Under First Party Policy

    Injured Construction Worker Settles for Five Hundred Thousand

    California Construction Bill Dies in Committee

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

    Coverage for Construction Defects Barred by Business Risk Exclusions
    Corporate Profile

    ISLE OF WIGHT COUNTY VIRGINIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Isle Of Wight County, Virginia 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
    Isle Of Wight County, Virginia

    In Colorado, Primary Insurers are Necessary Parties in Declaratory Judgment Actions

    December 9, 2011 — Heather M. Anderson, Colorado Construction Litigation

    The United States District Court for the District of Colorado recently ruled that primary insurers are necessary parties, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 19, in a declaratory judgment action being pursued by an excess carrier. See Insurance Co. of State of Pennsylvania v. LNC Communities II, LLC, 2011 WL 5548955 (D. Colo. 2011). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19 is almost identical to Colorado Rule of Civil Procedure 19 and pertains to the joinder of persons needed for “just adjudication.” The Insurance Co. of the State of Pennsylvania (“ICSOP”) sought a declaratory judgment that it did not have a duty to defend or indemnify the defendants (collectively referred to as “Lennar Companies”) with regard to the underlying lawsuit brought by The Falls at Legend Trail Owners Association, Inc. (the “HOA”). Id. at *2. In its lawsuit, the HOA alleged Lennar Companies were liable for construction defects at The Falls at Legend Trail residential development.

    Lennar Companies held two primary insurance policies, one issued by OneBeacon Insurance Company f/k/a General Accident Insurance Company (“General Accident”) and the other issued by American Safety Risk Retention Group, Inc. (“American Safety”). Lennar Companies also carried excess policies issued by ICSOP and Ohio Casualty Insurance Company (“Ohio Casualty”).

    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


    Construction Workers Face Dangers on the Job

    November 18, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    OSHA calculates that for each 33,000 active construction workers, one will die on the job each year, making their risk over the course of their careers at one out of every 200 workers. This puts it many times over OSHA’s definition of “significant risk” of 1 death per 1,000 workers over the course of their careers. According to an article in People’s World, “the main risk of death is from falls.”

    At a talk at the American Public Health Association’s meeting, one expert noted that “construction workers make up 6 percent to 8 percent of all workers, but account for 20 percent of all deaths on the job every year.”

    Read the full story…


    Insurance Company Must Show that Lead Came from Building Materials

    August 17, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals for Louisiana has reversed the summary judgment of a lower court in the case of Widder v. Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Company. Judge Roland L. Belsome wrote the opinion for the panel of three judges. Ms. Widder discovered that her home and its content were contaminated by lead. She applied to her insurer, Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance, which denied her claim.

    In response to Ms. Widder’s suit, LCPIC applied for a summary judgment on the grounds that there was no physical loss and that the policy did not cover defective material, latents defects, and pollution damage.

    The appeals court found that the lead contamination of Widder’s home did meet the standards of a direct physical loss, citing a recent Chinese Drywall case. There, it was found, “when a home has been rendered unusable or uninhabitable, physical damage is not necessary.”

    The lower court addressed only one of LCPIC’s exclusions, addressing only the exclusion on basis of “faulty, inadequate or defective material.” The appeals court noted that the evidence offered at trial does not show that the building materials were the source of the lead. This provided the appeals court with a matter of fact to remand to the lower court.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Quarter Four a Good One for Luxury Homebuilder

    December 20, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Toll Brothers has announced that their fourth-quarter net income is $2.35 per share, which they attribute in part to an income tax benefit. Their revenue, at $632.8 million, easily exceeded analysts’ projections of $565.1 million. Additionally, their number of signed contracts jumped seventy percent while their cancellation rate dropped nearly half to 4.9 percent.

    Read the full story…


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

    April 14, 2011 — April 14, 2011 - CDCoverage.com

    In Travelers Property Casualty Co. v. Centex Homes, No. C 10-02757 (N.D. Cal. April 1, 2011), general contractor Centex was sued by homeowners for construction defects. Centex tendered its defense to Travelers as an additional insured under policies issued by Travelers to two Centex subcontractors. Travelers agreed to defend Centex under a reservation of rights and selected defense counsel to defend Centex. Centex refused to accept the defense, asserting that it was entitled to select defense counsel. Travelers filed suit against Centex seeking a declaratory judgment that Centex had breached the duty to cooperate condition in the Travelers’ policy.

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com


    Unlicensed Contractors Nabbed in Sting Operation

    September 9, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The California State License Board charged sixteen people in the Fresno area with accepting contracting jobs without licenses. The Statewide Investigative Fraud Team of the CSLB set up a sting operation at a home in Clovis, California seeking bids on tree service, painting, and general contracting services. Those who bid for jobs at more than $500 are required under California law to be licensed. Unlicensed contractors can only work on jobs with a cost to the homeowner of less than $500 and must inform the homeowner that they are not licensed.

    In addition to citing contractors for not possessing appropriate licenses, the CSLB also cited contractors for failure to carry workers compensation insurance and illegal advertising. Further, California law limits down payments to the lesser of ten percent or $1,000. Two contractors were cited for requesting excessive down payments.

    One contractor, an unlicensed tree service contractor, had been cited previously in a sting operation. He failed to show up for his court date.

    Read the full story…


    Liability policy covers negligent construction: GA high court

    October 31, 2010 — Original article by Michael Bradford in Business Insurance

    ATLANTA—Negligent construction that results in damage to surrounding property constitutes an occurrence under a commercial general liability policy, the Georgia Supreme Court has ruled.

    In a 6-1 opinion Monday in American Empire Surplus Lines Insurance Co. Inc. vs. Hathaway Development Co. Inc., the Georgia high court upheld a lower court ruling that the general contractor’s claim for damage caused by a subcontractor’s faulty plumbing work was covered.

    The ruling on construction defects is the latest in number of such cases across the United States

    Read Full Story...

    Reprinted courtesy of Michael Bradford of Business Insurance.


    Court Grants Summary Judgment to Insurer in HVAC Defect Case

    August 4, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The US District Court in Colorado has determined in the case of RK Mechanical, Inc. v. Travelers Property Casualty Company of America that Travelers did not breach its insurance contract when it refused to cover RK Mechanical.

    RK Mechanical performed an HVAC installation for a residential project for which J.E. Dunn Rocky Mountain was the general contractor. As part of the work, RK “installed approximately one hundred seventy-one CPVC flanges, which were manufactured by Charlotte Pipe and Foundry Company.” Two of these flanges failed in June, 2009 leading to water damage. RK replaced the cracked flanges and engaged in water remediation. “Travelers paid Dunn and RK for the costs associated with the water damage associated with the Flange Failure.” The court notes that Travelers did not pay for the cracked flanges, however.

    Subsequently, RK examined the remaining flanges, finding many cracked ones. These were replaced with new ones. Later, all the Charlotte flanges were replaced with ones from another manufacturer. RK applied for coverage.

    All sides brought in their experts: “Microbac Laboratories, Inc. prepared a report on behalf of RK concluding that the Flange Failure was due, in part, to an assembly or workmanship defect in addition to manufacturing defects in the flanges. Higgins & Associates prepared a report on behalf of Travelers concluding that the flanges failed due to improper installation. Plastic Failure Labs prepared a report on behalf of the flange manufacturer concluding that the flanges failed due to improper installation by RK.”

    At this point, Travelers denied coverage. RK sued alleging that the coverage for flange failure and water damage implicitly includes mitigation costs. The court rejected this claim, noting it would do so even if Travelers had paid for the replacement of the first two flanges. Nor did the court find that replacement of the faulty flanges is not "a covered cause of loss." RK also argued that as it was required to mitigate, Travelers was obligated to cover costs. However, the court found that “the mitigation costs expended by RK were not incurred in an effort to avoid damages from a potential breach of contract by Travelers.” The court additionally noted that despite RK’s claims, the Colorado courts have not found a common law duty to mitigate. Finally, the court found that the exclusions in the policy were not in violation of public policy.

    Read the court’s decision…


    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…


    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


    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


    Construction Delayed by Discovery of Bones

    June 28, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Work stopped on a $7 million construction project in Oak Harbor, Washington, after three sets of Native American remains were found. The Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation had suggested that the project employ an archaeologist. City, state, and tribal officials are determining what will happen next. The Seattle Times reports that Jim Slowik, Oak Harbor’s mayor, has asked for a review of why no archaeologist was part of the project.

    Read the full story…


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

    March 1, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Wall Street Journal reports that nearly twenty tons of steel fell forty stories at the World Trade Center site on February 16. One person was checked by medical personnel. One person who works in the Financial District said it was “almost like thunder.” Frank Pensabene, one of the ironworkers on the site said that after “loud boom,” “all hell broke loose.” The steel beams and cables fell onto a flatbed truck, which was not occupied at the time.

    Read the full story…


    Construction Defects Are Occurrences, Says South Carolina High Court

    December 20, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The South Carolina Supreme Court has left the legislature’s new, expanded definition of “occurrence” in place, declining to declare it unconstitutional. South Carolina included faulty workmanship as an occurrence in response to a Supreme Court decision, which the court later reversed. One of the parties in that earlier decision, Harleysville Insurance, challenged the new law, claiming that the legislature didn’t have the power to pass a law to overturn a court ruling. The court did not concur.

    However, the court did determine that the law was not retroactive and covered only claims filed after the law became effective in May 2011. The Chief Justice of South Carolina noted that “insurance coverage for construction liability lacks clarity, particularly with respect to whether construction defects constitute ‘occurrences’ under construction general insurance policies.”

    Read the full story…


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

    December 20, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The Eleventh Circuit certified a question to the Georgia Supreme Court, asking whether property damage can constitute an "occurrence" under a CGL policy where its effects are not felt on "other property." HDI-Gerling Am. Ins. Co. v. Morrison Homes, Inc., 2012 U.S. App. Ct. LEXIS 23813 (11th Cir. Nov. 19, 2012).

    The general contractor, Taylor Morrison Services, Inc., was covered by a CGL policy issued by Gerling.  The policy excluded "expected or intended injury," contractual liability," and business risk exclusions. Morrison was sued by homeowners in a class action suit. Morrison had allegedly omitted four inches of gravel required beneath the base of the concrete foundations by the Uniform Building Code. Thereafter, the houses sustained water intrusion, cracks in the floors and driveways, and warped and buckling flooring.

    Gerling defended, but sued Morrison for a declaratory judgment.

    Read the full story…

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


    After Katrina Came Homes that Could Withstand Isaac

    October 23, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, Louisiana adopted its first uniform building code. Under the new standards, homes are better able to withstand the winds generated by hurricanes. The owner of one home said that during Hurricane Isaac, “there’s no shaking of the building itself, there’s no sign of a storm except for the rain.”

    WWWLTV reports that the new standards require home to be able to withstand 130 mile per hour winds. They also must follow FEMA guidelines for elevation. Build Now, a non-profit organization, is seeking to build green homes that meet the new standards. Their executive director said “we’re building higher. We’re building stronger. We’re building greener.”

    Read the full story…


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

    November 18, 2011 — Tred Eyerley, Insurance Law Hawaii

    Application of the facts to the "your work" exclusion was the key to resolving coverage issued in Am. Home Assurance Co. v. Cat Tech L.L.C., 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 21076 (5th Cir. Oct. 5, 2011).

    Ergon Refining, Inc. hired Cat Tech L.L.C. to service a hydrotreating reactor. In January 2005, Cat Tech replaced certain parts in the reactor. After Cat Tech finished the job and left, Ergon noticed a high pressure drop in the reactor, forcing it to be shut down. Cat Tech returned in February 2005, removed, repaired and replaced the damaged parts, and loaded new parts. After completion, a second large pressure drop occurred during the reactor’s start-up process. The reactor was shut down until October 2005, when Ergon hired a different contractor to perform the repair work. Additional damage to the reactor was found.

    Read the full story…

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


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

    August 11, 2011 — CDCoverage.com

    In Continental Western Ins. Co. v. Shay Construction, Inc., No. 10-cv-02126 (D. Col. July 28. 2011), general contractor Milender White subcontracted with insured Shay for framing work.   Shay in turn subcontracted some of its work to others.  When Shay?s subcontractors filed suit against Shay and Milender White seeking payment for their work, Milender White cross-claimed against Shay for breach of contract alleging that,Milender White notified Shay during construction that some of Shay?s work was defective and that when Shay repaired its defective work, it damaged work performed by others.  Shay’s CGL insurer Continental Western filed suit against Milender White and Shay seeking a judicial declaration of no coverage.  The federal district trial court granted Continental Western?s motion for summary judgment.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com