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

    Florida Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

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


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Inverness Florida

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Citrus Cty Bldr Assn
    Local # 1006
    1196 S Lecanto Hwy
    Lecanto, FL 34461
    http://www.citrusbuilders.com

    Home Builders Association of Lake County
    Local # 1026
    1100 N Joanna Ave
    Tavares, FL 32778
    http://www.lakehba.com

    Home Builders Association of Metro Orlando
    Local # 1040
    544 Mayo Ave
    Maitland, FL 32751
    http://www.hbaofmetroorlando.com

    Marion County Building Industry Association
    Local # 1038
    2635 SE 58th Avenue
    Ocala, FL 34480
    http://www.mcbia.org

    Hernando Bldrs Assoc
    Local # 1010
    7391 Sunshine Grove Rd
    Brooksville, FL 34613
    http://www.hernandobuilders.com

    Volusia Building Industry Association
    Local # 1090
    3520 W International Speedway Blvd
    Daytona Beach, FL 32124
    http://www.volusiahomebuilders.org

    Home Builders & CA of Brevard
    Local # 1012
    1500 W Eau Gallie Blvd Ste A
    Melbourne, FL 32935
    http://www.hbca-brevard.org


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Inverness Florida

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

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

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

    Wisconsin “property damage” caused by an “occurrence.”

    More Charges in Las Vegas HOA Scandal

    Construction Employment Rises in Half of the States

    Coverage Exists Under Ensuing Loss Provision

    Water Drainage Case Lacks Standing

    Destruction of Construction Defect Evidence Leads to Sanctions against Plaintiff

    Hospital Construction Firm Settles Defect Claim for $1.1 Million

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

    Water Is the Enemy

    Australian Developer Denies Building Problems Due to Construction Defects

    Court Voids Settlement Agreement in Construction Defect Case

    Insurance Policy Provides No Coverage For Slab Collapse in Vision One

    State Audit Questions College Construction Spending in LA

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

    Federal Judge Dismisses Insurance Coverage Lawsuit In Construction Defect Case

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

    The Hidden Dangers of Construction Defect Litigation

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

    Insurer Not Liable for Construction Defect Revealed by Woodpecker

    Partial Settlement in DeKalb Construction Management Case

    Insurers Reacting to Massachusetts Tornadoes

    Tampa Condo Owners Allege Defects

    Green Buildings Could Lead to Liabilities

    LEED Certified Courthouse Square Negotiating With Insurers, Mulling Over Demolition

    Harmon Towers Case to Last into 2014

    Tucson Officials to Discuss Construction Defect Claim

    North Carolina Exclusion j(6) “That Particular Part”

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

    Bill Seeks to Protect Legitimate Contractors

    Building Boom Leads to Construction Defect Cases

    Construction Defects Lead to Demolition

    Avoid Gaps in Construction Defect Coverage

    San Diego Construction Defect Claim Settled for $2.3 Million

    Texas contractual liability exclusion

    Arizona Homeowners Must Give Notice of Construction Defect Claims

    School District Settles Construction Lawsuit

    Fifth Circuit Asks Texas Supreme Court to Clarify Construction Defect Decision

    South Carolina Law Clarifies Statue of Repose

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

    Parking Garage Collapse May Be Due to Construction Defect

    Mobile Home Owners Not a Class in Drainage Lawsuit

    Consulting Firm Indicted and Charged with Falsifying Concrete Reports

    Florida Contractor on Trial for Bribing School Official

    Fire Reveals Defects, Appeals Court Affirms Judgment against Builder

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

    Judge Rejects Extrapolation, Harmon Tower to Remain Standing

    OSHA Cites Construction Firm for Safety Violations

    Architectural Firm Disputes Claim of Fault

    Construction on the Rise in Washington Town

    Badly Constructed Masonry Walls Not an Occurrence in Arkansas Law

    Florida County Suspends Impact Fees to Spur Development

    Plaintiffs In Construction Defect Cases to Recover For Emotional Damages?

    Renovation Contractors: Be Careful How You Disclose Your Projects

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

    BHA Expands Construction Experts Group

    Architect Not Responsible for Injuries to Guests

    Ohio Adopts Energy-Efficient Building Code

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

    Court finds subcontractor responsible for defending claim

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

    Insurer Beware: Failure to Defend Ends with Hefty Verdict

    Construction Firm Charged for Creating “Hail” Damage

    Construction Suit Ends with Just an Apology

    Condo Owners Allege Construction Defects

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

    Illinois Court Determines Insurer Must Defend Negligent Misrepresentation Claim

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

    Preventing Costly Litigation Through Your Construction Contract

    Homeowners Not Compelled to Arbitration in Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Florida Property Bill Passes Economic Affairs Committee with Amendments

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

    Residential Construction Down in San Diego

    Lawsuit over Construction Defects Not a Federal Case

    Underpowered AC Not a Construction Defect

    Statute of Repose Dependant on When Subcontractors Finished

    Construction Spending Dropped in July

    Architect Not Liable for Balcony’s Collapse

    Construction Delayed by Discovery of Bones

    Landmark San Diego Hotel Settles Defects Suit for $6.4 Million

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

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

    Coverage Rejected Under Owned Property and Alienated Property Exclusions

    Read Her Lips: “No New Buildings”

    California Supreme Court to Examine Arbitration Provisions in Several Upcoming Cases

    Contractors Admit Involvement in Kickbacks

    Insurer’s Motion for Summary Judgment Based on Earth Movement Exclusion Denied

    Ohio Casualty’s and Beazer’s Motions were Granted in Part, and Denied in Part
    Corporate Profile

    INVERNESS FLORIDA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Inverness, Florida Construction Expert Witness Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 5,500 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Inverness' most recognized construction litigation practitioners, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, as well as a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Inverness Florida forensic architect construction defect expert witnessInverness Florida forensic architect slope failure expert witnessInverness Florida forensic architect reconstruction expert witnessInverness Florida forensic architect construction project management expert witnessesInverness Florida forensic architect construction expert witness public projectsInverness Florida forensic architect construction cost estimating expert witnessInverness Florida forensic architect consulting general contractor
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Inverness, Florida

    Will They Blow It Up?

    March 28, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The issues concerning the Harmon Towers building in Las Vegas continue to make their way through the courts. As we noted in a previous piece, Cook County building officials stated that the building could be a hazard if Las Vegas were struck by an earthquake. The question of whether the building will continue to stand is just one of the issues in front of a judge.

    MGM Resorts International argued at a March 13 hearing for permission to implode the Harmon hotel building. They claim that more than 1,700 defects have been discovered in the building and that the building is a public safety hazard. Arguing against demolition, Perini Building Company, the general contractor for the hotel, and its subcontractors are claiming that imploding the building would destroy evidence and prejudice juries in the ongoing construction defect claims. They claim that MGM Resorts wishes to abandon the building due to the economic slowdown. Perini Corp, the contractor for the project, claims that the building can be fixed. Perini claims that MGM’s position in the construction trial would be improved if the building is demolished.

    After Judge Elizabeth Gonzalez heard the four days of testimony on the Harmon Towers building and whether it should be demolished, she scheduled more testimony, with two days in April and an entire week in July. Judge Gonzalez will be deciding whether the building will be torn down, imploded, or left in place.

    Read the full story…

    Read the full story…


    Architectural Firm Disputes Claim of Fault

    May 27, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Lake-Flato Architects has disputed the arbitration panel’s conclusion that problems with the home of Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson were due to design flaws. The firm settled with the couple for $900,000, however the Idaho Mountain Express reports that David Lake said, “the settlement in the case in no way represents that Lake Flato was responsible for faulty design.” The Express reported that “the arbitrators found that problems at the home were attributable to design errors that did not take into account the cold winter climate of the Sun Valley area.”

    Read the full story…


    After Breaching its Duty to Defend, Insurer Must Indemnify

    August 11, 2011 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    In a brief decision analyzing Oregon law, the Ninth Circuit determined that once an insurer breaches its duty to defend, it must indemnify. See Desrosiers v. Hudson Speciality Ins. Co., 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 12591 (9th CIr. June 21, 2011).

    The victim secured a judgment against the insured after he was beaten by another patron outside the insured's bar. Hudson Speciality Insurance refused to defend the insured, claiming the injury arose from an assault and battery, which excluded coverage.

    Read the full story…

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


    Construction Jobs Expected to Rise in Post-Hurricane Rebuilding

    November 7, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Businessweek reports that construction jobs and materials will see increased demand as property owners in New York and New Jersey rebuild after hurricane Sandy. Tom Jeffery, of Irvine, California-based CoreLogic, a real estate information service, noted that “a high percent of damaged properties are going to be repaired.” Experts estimate property damage to total anywhere from $7 billion to $40 billion.

    It is also estimated that about 739,000 properties in the area are underwater in the way that has nothing to do with flooding, with negative equity of 25 percent or more. Many of these homeowners are likely to walk away from their mortgages.

    Ken Simonson, chief economist of the Associated General Contractors of America, expects “localized spikes in construction employment throughout November and the winter.” Martin Connor, the chief financial officer of Toll Brothers, expects to see more a rise in labor costs than in materials.

    Read the full story…


    Claims Under Colorado Defect Action Reform Act Count as Suits

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Colorado Court of Appeals has affirmed the judgment of the lower court in Melssen v. Auto-Owners Insurance. The Melssens built a custom home for the Holleys, during which time the Melssens retained a comprehensive general liability policy from Auto-Owners, which “obligated Auto-Owerns to defend the Melssens with respect to any ‘suit’ seeking damages for ‘property damage’ during the policy period.” Soon after the house was constructed, cracks developed in the drywall, then outside stucco and basement slab. The Holleys contended that “approximately $300,000 of damages to the Holleys’ property was caused by the Melssens’ engineering and construction defects” and filed a claim under the Colorado Defect Action Reform Act (CDARA). The Melssens “demanded Auto-Owners defend and indemnify the Melssens and forwared Auto-Owners the notice of claim.”

    Although the Melssens notified Auto-Owners in June 2008, it was not until October 2008 that Auto-Owners denied coverage stating that the claims were sustained outside the policy period. The Melssens filed an action against Auto-Owners. At trial, the jury ruled in favor of the Melssens awarding them damages, to which the trial court added costs and attorney fees.

    On appeal, Auto-Owners contended that the trial court erred in allowing the Melssens to argue that the CDARA notice of claim “was the functional equivalent of a complaint commencing a suit.” The appeals court found that “the CDARA notice of claim process constituted an alternative dispute resolution proceeding under the policy.” The court agreed that jury should not have been asked to determine if a CDARA action is a “suit,” but as the jury found for the Melssens, the concluding it “constituted harmless error.” Further, the court found that an action under the CDARA satisfied the definition of a “suit.”

    The court found for the Melssens, affirming the lower court’s decision and remanding the case to the lower court for the awarding of appeals costs to the Melssens.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Businesspeople to Nevada: Revoke the Construction Defect Laws

    March 1, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Nevada chapter of the National Federation of Independent Businesses has said that Nevada’s construction defect and minimum wage laws are hampering job growth. The organization conducted a survey, and although only about two percent of the members responded, they passed the opinions of the group on to Governor Brian Sandoval. Sandoval has said, according to the report by Fox News Reno, that he wants the state to be more business friendly. He supports reforms to Nevada’s construction defect laws, saying that he’d “like to see some reform” on the issue of mandatory attorney’s fees.

    Randi Thompson, the spokesperson for the Nevada chapter of the National Federation of Independent Businesses, said that members of her organization would like to see current Nevada construction defect law revoked. She described current law as “driven towards lawyers and not toward protecting consumers.”

    Read the full story…


    SB800 Cases Approach the Courts

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

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

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

    Read the full story…


    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…


    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…


    Rihanna Finds Construction Defects Hit a Sour Note

    August 2, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The pop singer Rihanna is suing the former owners of her Beverley Hills home among others in a construction defect lawsuit. She contends that Adriana and Heather Rudomin concealed defects in the home that lead to water leaks and flooding during a 2010 storm. The Beverly Hills Patch noted that the dollar amount of the singer’s suit was not specified.

    The most recent court ruling denied a motion from the owners to be dismissed from the lawsuit. They remain part of it, along Landmark Design Group, LLC, which renovated the home before the sale, and Prudential California Realty which sold the home.

    Read the full story…


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

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

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

    Read Full Text of Hawaii State Senate Resolution


    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…


    Toxic Drywall Not Covered Under Homeowner’s Policy

    March 28, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Duphuys of Baton Rouge Louisiana found themselves needing to argue both sides of an issue, according to the judge in Duphuy v. USAA Casualty Insurance Company. The Duphuys alleged that the drywall in their home “emits odorous gases that cause damage to air-condition and refrigerator coils, copper tubing, electrical wiring, computer wiring, and other household items.” Additionally, they reported damage to “their home’s insulation, trimwork, floors, cabinets, carpets, and other items” which they maintained were “covered under the ‘ensuing loss’ portion of their policy.”

    Their insurer declined coverage, stating that the damages were not a “direct, physical loss,” and even if they were “four different exclusions independently exclude coverage, even if such loss occurred.” The policy excludes defective building materials, latent defects, pollutants, and corrosion damage. The court noted that “ambiguities in policy exclusions are construed to afford coverage to the insured.”

    The court did determine that the Duphuys were not in “a situation where the plaintiffs caused the risk for which they now seek coverage.” The judge cited an earlier case, In re Chinese Drywall, “a case with substantially similar facts and construing the same policy” and in that case, “property damage” was determined to “include the loss of use of tangible property.” The court’s conclusion was that the Duphuys “suffered a direct, physical loss triggering coverage under their policy.”

    Unfortunately for the Duphuys, at this point the judge noted that while they had a “direct, physical loss,” the exclusions put them “in the tough predicament of claiming the drywall is neither defective nor its off-gassing corrosive or a pollutant, but nonetheless damage-causing.”

    In the earlier Chinese Drywall case, the judge found that “faulty and defective materials” “constitutes a physical thing tainted by imperfection or impairment.” The case “found the drywall served its intended purpose as a room divider and insulator but nonetheless qualified under the exclusion, analogizing the drywall to building components containing asbestos that courts have previously determined fit under the same exclusion.” In the current case, the judge concluded that the drywall was “outside the realm of coverage under the policy.”

    The court also found that it had to apply the corrosion exclusion, noting that the plaintiffs tried to evade this by stating, “simplistically and somewhat disingenuously, that the damage is not caused by corrosion but by the drywall itself.” The plaintiffs are, however, parties to another Chinese drywall case, Payton v. Knauf Gips KG, in which “they directly alleged that ‘sulfides and other noxious gases, such as those emitted from [Chinese] drywall, cause corrosion and damage to personal property.’” As the court pointed out, the Duphuys could not claim in one case that the corrosion was caused by gases emitted by the drywall and in another claim it was the drywall itself. “They hope their more ambiguous allegations will be resolved in their favor and unlock the doors to discovery.”

    The court quickly noted that “the remaining damage allegations are too vague and conclusory to construe” and permitted “exploration of the latent defect and pollution exclusions.”

    The judge concluded that the plaintiffs did not provide sufficient facts to establish coverage under the ensuing loss provision, stating that the “plaintiffs must allege, at the very least, how the drywall causes damage to the trimwork, carpet, etc., not simply that it does so.” Given the court’s determinations in the case, the plaintiffs’ motion was dismissed.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Contractors Admit Involvement in Kickbacks

    December 9, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Two New Jersey contractors have pleaded guilty to charges that they made false representations for a government contract in a case related to kickbacks for construction work done in two school districts. New Jersey is recommending that the two men, Martin Starr and Stephen Gallagher, will each pay $50,000 in penalties, serve up to a year in jail, and be unable to accept public contracts for five years.

    Last month, another individual in the case, Kenneth Disko, who had been the engineer for the school district, pleaded guilty on a similar charge. In addition to a $50,000 penalty, he will be serving three to five years in prison. A fourth conspirator, Robert Berman, the former business administrator for one of the school districts, has to pay a $13,000 fine and cooperate with the investigation. He is also barred from public employment in New Jersey and has been terminated from his position.

    Starr admitted to preparing fictitious quotes which appeared to be from other contractors in order that his firm would seem to be the lowest bidder. Gallagher helped in preparing the fictitious bids and also provided cash kickbacks to Disko.

    Read the full story…


    Loose Bolts Led to Sagging Roof in Construction Defect Claim

    February 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Though the sagging roof is neither leaking nor a safety hazard, the town of Waynesville, North Carolina is suing the builder of its new fire station, as reported in the Smoky Mountain News. The engineers who examined the roof found a substantial number of loose bolts in the roof trusses. Additionally, the trusses themselves have become bent.

    Tom Galloway, Waynesville’s Town Manager said “it needs to be remedied and fixed.” He said that the builder, Construction Logic, “never indicated a willingness to fix the roof.” The town is seeking the cost of repair, which Galloway estimated could be $400,000, and an additional $30,000 in damages. The suit states that Construction Logic failed to follow the plan specifications for the roof.

    Read the full story…


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

    April 25, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Writing in Oregon’s Daily Journal of Commerce, David Anderson looks at the aftermath of the case Abraham v. T. Henry Construction, Inc. In that case, Anderson notes that “the homeowners hired a contractor to build their house, and subsequently discovered extensive water damage” “after expiration of the time to sue for breach of contract.” The homeowners claimed negligence. Oregon’s Supreme Court concluded that “homeowners only had to prove that the contractor negligently caused reasonably foreseeable harm to the homeowner’s property.”

    Anderson views this decision as leading to two risks for contractors. “First, contractors can be held liable in tort for breaching building code standards; second, they can be held liable for violating the often-difficult-to-define ‘reasonable care’ standard.” But here, “contract can be king.” The Oregon Supreme Court noted that the contractor “could have avoided exposure to the general ‘reasonable care’ standard by more carefully defining its obligations in the original construction contract.”

    He notes that contractors who fail to define their obligations or use generic definitions “may be exposing themselves to a more vague scope of liability.”

    Read the full story…


    Nevada District Court Dismisses Case in Construction Defect Coverage Suit

    August 16, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The United States District Court of Nevada has dismissed a case filed by Maryland Casualty Company against National Fire & Marine Insurance Company. This case follows a case in which National was sued over “200 causes of action arising out of 193 separate insurance coverage disputes related to 75 different insureds and 163 unrelated construction defect or Chapter 40 proceedings across seven states.” The judge in this initial case severed the plaintiffs, as he found that allowing joinder “would make this case impossible to manage.” In this particular instance, National seeks to have the claims made by Maryland Casualty dismissed.

    Maryland Casualty alleged that for insurance policies issued to 38 companies, National was obligated to defend the insured. National was, according to the plaintiff, named as defendants in 72 unrelated lawsuits to which National disclaimed coverage. However, the court found that Maryland Casualty failed “to provide enough detail regarding the relevant property damage, policies, claims, and time periods.” The court found that Maryland failed to “state a claim upoin which relief can be granted.

    The court also found that “the Complaint lacks any well-pled allegations from which the Court could conclude the Plaintiff has standing since the Complaint is devoid of information about the specific policies at issue.

    The court did allow Maryland Casualty up to September 3, 2012 in which to file an amended complaint.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Condo Owners Worried Despite Settlement

    September 13, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    KB Homes may have settled a construction defect claim with Willowbrook Condominium Association, but some of the owners are still concerned about the repair process. The Sarasota, Florida Herald Tribune reports that one homeowner’s living room “ends with a white tarp.” He told the paper, “We feel like we’re not even owners of our own home.” A neighbor wondered “what happens when people get displaced while their homes are gutted?”

    As part of the agreement, the condominium association will be selecting a contractor to repair the problems, while the cost will be paid by KB Homes. Nevertheless, at least one owner fears for their ability to resell his home, noting that even after repairs have been made, “do you think someone’s going to come in here and buy?”

    Read the full story…