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

    Tennessee Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: (HB 2787/SB2931 & HB 2771/SB 2201; Title 66, Chptr 36) Homeowners must serve written notice of a defect 15 days after its discovery; Contractors, upon receipt of the notice, have 10 business days to inspect the residence and inform any subcontractors it believes are reasonably responsible on the defect. Within 10 business days after notice of the claim, the subcontractor must serve a written response to contractor. Within 30 days after receipt of notice of a defect, the contractor must provide written notice of intention (repair, replace, monetarily compensate or reject) to the homeowner.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Huntingdon Tennessee

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Home Builders Association of Greater Knoxville
    Local # 4455
    221 Clark St
    Knoxville, TN 37921
    http://www.hbaknoxville.com

    Home Builders Association of Middle Tennessee
    Local # 4477
    9007 Overlook Blvd Suite 201
    Brentwood, TN 37027
    http://www.hbamt.net/

    Home Builders Association of Cumberland Co
    Local # 4410
    PO Box 507
    Crossville, TN 38557
    http://www.cumberlandcountyhomebuilders.com

    Home Builders Association of Dyer Co
    Local # 4425
    1075 Cooper Dr
    Dyersburg, TN 38024


    Home Builders Association of Rutherford Cty
    Local # 4490
    730-A Middle Tennessee Blvd Suite 5
    Murfreesboro, TN 37129
    http://www.rchba.info/

    Home Builders Association of Sevier Co
    Local # 4486
    PO Box 4653
    Sevierville, TN 37864
    http://www.seviercountyhba.com

    Home Builders Association of Upper Cumberland
    Local # 4491
    PO Box 243
    Cookeville, TN 38503
    http://www.uchba.com


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Huntingdon Tennessee

    Contractor Burns Down Home, Insurer Refuses Coverage

    Cleveland Condo Board Says Construction Defects Caused Leaks

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

    Delays in Filing Lead to Dismissal in Moisture Intrusion Lawsuit

    Bar to Raise on Green Standard

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

    No Coverage Under Ensuing Loss Provision

    Arizona Homeowners Must Give Notice of Construction Defect Claims

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Despite Construction Defects

    Texas Law Bars Coverage under Homeowner’s Policy for Mold Damage

    No Coverage for Construction Defects Under Alabama Law

    OSHA Extends Delay of Residential Construction Fall Protection Requirements

    Brown Paint Doesn’t Cover Up Construction Defects

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

    Texas “your work” exclusion

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

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

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

    Unlicensed Contractors Nabbed in Sting Operation

    Are Construction Defects Covered by Your General Liability Policy?

    History of Defects Leads to Punitive Damages for Bankrupt Developer

    Tacoma Construction Site Uncovers Gravestones

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

    Boyfriend Pleads Guilty in Las Vegas Construction Defect Scam Suicide

    Condominium Communities Must Complete Construction Defect Repairs, Says FHA

    More Charges in Las Vegas HOA Scandal

    Park District Sues over Leaky Roof

    The Flood Insurance Reform Act May be Extended to 2016

    Massachusetts Couple Seek to Recuse Judge in Construction Defect Case

    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

    Court Voids Settlement Agreement in Construction Defect Case

    Insurer Must Defend Claims for Diminution in Value of Damaged Property

    Building Boom Leads to Construction Defect Cases

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

    Timing of Insured’s SIR Payment Has No Effect on Non-Participating Insurer’s Equitable Contribution to Co-Insurer

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

    Consumer Protection Act Whacks Seattle Roofing Contractor

    Gut Feeling Does Not Disqualify Expert Opinion

    Workers Hurt in Casino Floor Collapse

    Contractor Sues Supplier over Defective Products

    Coverage Exists Under Ensuing Loss Provision

    Condo Owners Allege Construction Defects

    Ensuing Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

    Hilton Grand Vacations Defect Trial Delayed

    David McLain to Speak at the CDLA 2012 Annual Conference

    Negligent Construction an Occurrence Says Ninth Circuit

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

    Judge Okays Harmon Tower Demolition, Also Calls for More Testing

    Nevada Construction Defect Lawyers Dead in Possible Suicides

    Australian Developer Denies Building Problems Due to Construction Defects

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

    Excess Carrier Successfully Appeals Primary Insurer’s Summary Judgment Award

    High School Gym Closed by Construction Defects

    Housing Prices Up through Most of Country

    Although Property Damage Arises From An Occurrence, Coverage Barred By Business Risk Exclusions

    Claims Under Colorado Defect Action Reform Act Count as Suits

    Changes to Arkansas Construction and Home Repair Laws

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

    New Web Site Tracks Settled Construction Defect Claims

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

    Colorado Court of Appeals holds that insurance companies owe duty of prompt and effective communication to claimants and repair subcontractors

    New OSHA Fall Rules to Start Early in Minnesota

    Insurer Unable to Declare its Coverage Excess In Construction Defect Case

    Exclusion Bars Coverage for Mold, Fungus

    FHA Lists Bridges and Overpasses that May Have Defective Grout

    Construction Defects Lead to Demolition

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend in Water Intrusion Case

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

    Contractor’s Home Not Covered for Construction Defects

    Appeals Court Reverses Summary Judgment over Defective Archway Construction

    No Coverage For Construction Defects When Complaint Alleges Contractual Damages

    No Choice between Homeowner Protection and Bankrupt Developers?

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

    Rihanna Finds Construction Defects Hit a Sour Note

    CC&Rs Not the Place for Arbitration Agreement, Court Rules

    Construction Company Head Pleads Guilty to Insurance and Tax Fraud

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

    Insurer Not Liable for Construction Defect Revealed by Woodpecker

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

    Construction Jobs Expected to Rise in Post-Hurricane Rebuilding

    Liability policy covers negligent construction: GA high court

    Construction Defect Not an Occurrence in Ohio

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

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

    Federal Court Denies Summary Judgment in Leaky Condo Conversion

    Senate Committee Approves Military Construction Funds

    Tucson Officials to Discuss Construction Defect Claim

    Avoid Gaps in Construction Defect Coverage

    Arbitration Clause Not Binding on Association in Construction Defect Claim

    Tampa Condo Owners Allege Defects
    Corporate Profile

    HUNTINGDON TENNESSEE CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

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

    Huntingdon Tennessee forensic architect architectural expert witnessHuntingdon Tennessee forensic architect multi family design expert witnessHuntingdon Tennessee forensic architect testifying construction expert witnessHuntingdon Tennessee forensic architect construction expertsHuntingdon Tennessee forensic architect construction code expert witnessHuntingdon Tennessee forensic architect building code compliance expert witnessHuntingdon Tennessee forensic architect ada design expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Huntingdon, Tennessee

    Court Orders House to be Demolished or Relocated

    April 26, 2011 — April 26, 2011 Beverley BevenFlorez - Construction Defect Journal

    Decision Affirmed in Central Arkansas Foundation Homes, LLC v. Rebecca Choate

    The Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed the decision by the trial court in Central Arkansas Foundation Homes, LLC v. Rebecca Choate. In the trial case, Central Arkansas Foundation Homes (CAFH) sought payment for a home built for Choate, while Choate alleged that the builders committed multiple construction defects including using the wrong foundation materials and positioning the house in the wrong direction.

    After the house was built, CAFH contacted Choate regarding payment, however, Choate alleged that the finished product did not match the contract. “ After CAFH completed construction, it obtained permanent home financing for Choate and tried to contact her to close the transaction. Choate did not respond until October 2005, when she sent CAFH a list of alleged construction defects, including that the house was facing in the wrong direction; that it was not built on a slab; and that the fireplace, garbage disposal, driveway, and storage area were missing. CAFH replied to Choate in writing, telling her that she had until January 6, 2006, to close on the house or CAFH would sell it. The correspondence enclosed worksheets showing that the amount Choate would owe at closing exceeded $94,000, which included interest that had accrued on the as-yet unpaid construction loan.”

    Initially, the court found in favor of CAFH. “On April 18, 2007, Choate’s attorney withdrew from representing her. Soon thereafter, CAFH’s attorney asked the court to set a final hearing on the case. The attorney purportedly sent Choate a letter by regular mail on May 15, 2007, advising her that the case was set for trial on July 9, 2007. Choate, however, did not appear. CAFH did appear, and its general manager, John Oldner, testified to events leading up to the case and the amount of damages claimed. According to Oldner, the interest on the construction loan had accrued to the point that CAFH now sought $104,965.88 from Choate. The court found in favor of CAFH and entered judgment for that amount, plus attorney fees, on July 18, 2007. The court ruled that CAFH could sell the house and either remit any excess to Choate or look to Choate for the deficiency if the sales price did not cover the judgment.”

    However, Choate successfully argued that she did not receive notice of the trial. A new trial was ordered, and the outcome was quite different. “On June 6, 2008, the circuit court entered judgment for Choate, ruling that the house was not in substantial compliance with the parties’ contract and that the contract should be rescinded. The court found that the house suffered from numerous construction defects, that the contract contemplated a slab rather than a concrete-pier foundation, and that CAFH ignored Choate’s complaints that the house was facing the wrong way. The judgment directed CAFH to hold Choate harmless on the construction loan, to deed Choate’s two acres back to her, and to remove the house from Choate’s property.”

    The Court of Appeals “found that Choate would be unjustly enriched by retaining the benefit of the septic systems and utility lines that CAFH installed on her land. The court therefore awarded $5340 to CAFH as a quantum-meruit recovery for the value of that work. CAFH contends that the award is not sufficient, but we see no clear error.” In the end, the Court of Appeals provided this reason for declining to reverse the trial court’s decision: “The court in this case apparently concluded that the house constructed by CAFH was so fundamentally at odds with Choate’s contractual expectations that she was not unjustly enriched and should simply be, as nearly as possible, returned to the status quo ante. Accordingly, the court ordered the house removed from her property and permitted CAFH to either relocate the house or salvage the house’s materials and unused appliances. We decline to reverse the court’s weighing of the equities in this manner.”

    Read the court’s decision…


    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


    The King of Construction Defect Scams

    June 19, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Echoing Businessweek, the Las Vegas Sun agrees that the Nevada HOA scandal is the “king of all Vegas real estate scams,” and says that the Nevada legislatures should take action. The Sun notes that the case involves only 12 out of 2,356 HOAs in Southern Nevada.

    To date, 25 people have plead guilty in the case. At the center were an attorney and contractor who allegedly referred work to each other. To enable this, they assembled a wider conspiracy of people who enriched by the process. In the words of the Sun, those involved “upended the concept of a ‘common interest’ community.”

    Read the full story…


    Federal Judge Dismisses Insurance Coverage Lawsuit In Construction Defect Case

    December 9, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    A federal judge dismissed a coverage lawsuit brought by Mid Continent Casualty Company against its insured, Greater Midwest Builders Ltd.

    Plaintiff brought this declaratory judgment action in response to a suit filed in Johnson County District Court, seeking a judicial determination that it had no coverage obligation for claims asserted against its insured. This case was stayed until the state court action entered judgment against the insured. The prevailing parties then commenced a garnishment action against the plaintiff, and another insurance company, in state court in Missouri. The court was asked whether it should lift the stay and proceed with the case, or decline jurisdiction in favor of resolution in the Missouri state court.

    The court granted the motion to dismiss holding that proceeding with the case would lead to protracted, piecemeal litigation, while deferring to the Missouri state court would decide all the claims involved in the dispute.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Virginia Chinese Drywall and pollution exclusion

    May 27, 2011 — CDCoverage.com

    In Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. The Overlook, LLC, No. 4:10cv69 (E.D. Va. May 13, 2011), homeowner Edmonds sued insured developer/general contractor Overlook seeking damages resulting from defective Chinese drywall installed in Edmonds’ home. Overlook’s CGL insurer Nationwide defended Overlook under a reservation of rights and filed a declaratory judgment action. The federal district trial court granted Nationwide’s motion for summary judgment.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com


    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…


    Architect Not Responsible for Injuries to Guests

    September 1, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The Texas Court of Appeals has ruled, with one dissent, that the architectural firm that designed a home was not responsible to the injuries caused to guests when a balcony collapsed. Judge David Puryear wrote the majority opinion in Black + Vernooy Architects v. Smith.

    Black + Vernooy designed a vacation home for Robert and Kathy Maxfield in 2000. The Maxfields hired a general contractor to build the home. The general contractor hired a subcontractor to build a balcony; however, the subcontractor did not follow the architect’s design in building the balcony.

    A year after the house was completed; the Maxfields were visited by Lou Ann Smith and Karen Gravely. The balcony collapsed under the two women. Ms. Gravely suffered a broken finger, a crushed toe, and bruises. Ms. Smith was rendered a paraplegic as a result of the fall. They sued the Maxfields, the general contractor, and the architects for negligence. The Maxfields and the general contractor settled. A jury found that the architects held 10% of the responsibility. The architects appealed the judgment of the district court.

    The Appeals Court reversed this judgment, noting that “there has been no allegation that the Architects negligently designed the balcony or that the Architects actually created the defects at issue.” Further, “the Smiths allege that the defect was caused by the construction practices of the contractor and subcontractor when the balcony was not built in accordance with the design plans of the Architects.”

    The court found that even though the architects had a duty “to endeavor to guard against defects and deficiencies in the construction of the home and to generally ascertain whether the home was being built in compliance with the construction plans,” this duty did not extend to third parties.

    Read the court’s decision…


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

    August 2, 2012 — Melissa Dewey Brumback, Construction Law North Carolina

    Long-time readers of the blog may remember my earlier post on substantial completion. However, in looking over my blog stats to see what search terms lead people here, it looks like this is hot topic. The blog searches came in two general categories:

    1. Those searching strictly for a definition of substantial completion. Some examples:

    • What does “substantial completion” mean?
    • when does a building achieve substantial completion
    • contracts “substantial completion”
    • substantial completion undefined
    • when is a project substantially complete

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback of Ragsdale Liggett PLLC. Ms. Brumback can be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com.


    San Diego Construction Defect Claim Settled for $2.3 Million

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Nauman Law firm has settled the lawsuit by the Latitude Owners Association against CS-Crossroads and others, as reported in the Sacramento Bee from a press release by the firm. The owners at Latitude, a condominium community in San Diego, found that hillside crawl spaces were not property waterproofed, leading to rotting plywood, water intrusion, and pipe leaks. There were additional problems with retrofitted windows and repairs of outside decks. The case was filed in San Diego Superior Court, but settled after multiple mediations.

    Read the full story…


    Drug Company Provides Cure for Development Woes

    November 18, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Vertex Pharmaceuticals is poised to become the holder of Boston’s biggest commercial lease, paying $72.5 million for 1.1 million square feet on Boston’s waterfront. Vertex’s new buildings are still under construction, but the plans have spurred other development in the Fan Pier area, according to the New York Times. The Times quotes Mary A. Burke, a senior economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston that the Vertex project gives “a big push” to the “momentum for economic growth.”

    The Fallon Company is building Vertex’s new laboratory and office space. They are separately planning to build a high-rise with 150 luxury condominium units. According to Joseph Fallon, the chief executive and president of the Fallon Company, there is already a waiting list of 50 buyers for the condominiums.

    Across the street from the Vertex site, a group including Morgan Stanley and Boston Global Investors is planning a 23-block mixed use project that would include 1.2 million square feet of retail space. Additionally, the New England Development and the Hanover Group is building a 356-unit apartment building at the adjacent Pier 4.

    Read the full story…


    Construction Defects and Contractor-Owners

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    On the expert advice site Avvo.com, a user asks if he can be sued for construction defects by the new owner of a building for which he served as general contractor and then owned for four years. He had construction insurance, but does not think he had construction defect insurance.

    A lawyer responding to his question says that “you could be sued.” In the event of a suit, “you would have to bring claims against all of your subcontractors.”

    Read the full story…


    Housing Market on Way to Recovery

    October 23, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Bloomberg News reports that new home purchases neared a two-year high, with July sales being the strongest since April 2010. Economists polled by Bloomberg expected an annual pace of 380,000 sales, the current levels are at 373,000. Strongest sales gains were in the Northeast, with a 20 percent jump. The Midwest and Western regions had small gains, and the South saw a drop of 4.9 percent. As the Northeast’s home prices are highest and the South’s the lowest, the pattern of sales lead to a sharp increase in median sales price.

    Meanwhile, existing stocks of homes continued to deplete, reaching a record low of 38,000 completed homes on the market. In response, builders are constructing new homes at a pace not seen since April 2010, accord to the Commerce Department.

    Read the full story…


    Florida trigger

    May 18, 2011 — May 18, 2011 - CDCoverage.com

    In Johnson-Graham-Malone, Inc. v. Austwood Enterprises, Inc., No. 16-2009-CA-005750-XXXX-MA (Fla. 4th Cir. Ct. Duval County, April 29, 2011), insured JGM was the general contractor for an apartment project completed in 1998. In 2007, the project owner sued JGM seeking damages for defective construction resulting in moisture penetration property damage. JGM tendered its defense to Amerisure. Amerisure denied a defense. JGM defended and settled the underlying suit and then filed suit against Amerisure seeking recovery of defense and settlement costs. The trial court granted JGM’s motion for partial summary judgment. The court first addressed Amerisure’s duty to defend. Applying Florida law, the court held that, although the underlying complaint alleged that the property damage was not discovered until after expiration of the Amerisure policies

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com


    Defective Grout May Cause Trouble for Bridges

    August 16, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Grout, which was used to protect the steel support cables of the Woodrow Wilson Bridge, may lead to problems instead. The Baltimore Sun reports that the Federal Highway Administration is looking at three dozen bridges in twenty-one states that were built with defective grout. The grout contains high levels of chlorides, which can lead to corrosion. The collapse of pedestrian walkway in Concord, North Carolina was attributed to chloride contamination in the grout.

    The grout, SikaGrout 300PT, was advertised as "non-corrosive, does not contain chlorides," but later testing showed that it contained levels that exceeded limits by 400 percent. Throughout the country, about 16 million pounds of this were used. Sika Corp. suspended production of the grout in 2010. If repairs need to be made, it is unclear who will pay.

    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


    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…


    Good Signs for Housing Market in 2013

    December 20, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Dan Green, a loan officer at Waterstone Mortgage, is optimistic about the construction market in 2013. He notes that the rise in building permit, housing starts, and housing completions are all good signs. Mortgage rates are still low, making these new homes attractive to buyers.

    Read the full story…


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

    August 4, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    On July 28, the Washington Court of Appeals ruled in Clasen Fruit & Cold Storage v. Frederick & Michael Construction Co., Inc. that more than six years had passed since a contractor had concluded work and so granted a summary dismissal of the suit.

    Frederick & Michael Construction Co., Inc. (F&M) was contracted to construct several buildings for Clasen Fruit and Cold Storage. These were completed in March, 1999. The buildings suffered wind damage to the roofs in 2001, 2003, 2005, and 2006. In the first two incidents, F&M repaired the roofs with Clasen paying for repairs.

    In 2005, Clasen hired Continuous Gutter to make repairs. The final incident was the collapse of the roof of one building. This was attributed to “excessive moisture in the roof’s vapor barriers.” At this point, Clasen demanded that F&M pay for repair and replacement costs. In 2008, Clasen sued F&M for damages for breach of contract and negligent design and construction of the roof.

    The decision then covered the meanings, in Washington law, of “termination of services” and “substantial completion.” The panel concluded that construction was “substantially completed in 1997” and “relevant services” by 2001. “But Clasen did not sue until 2008, some seven years after termination of any roof related services.”

    Read the court’s decision…