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

    Texas Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: HB 730 amended the Texas Property Code by adding Title 16 and amending chapter 27. Overseen by the Texas Residential Construction Commission (TRCC) the code asserts that a contractor is not liable for any percentage of damages caused by failure to take reasonable action to mitigate damages or take reasonable action to maintain the residence. It also limits damages, requires written notification and response for right of repair and defines warranty periods. Additionally, SB 754 states“(5-10 Sec. 27.107) a contractor may assert as an affirmative defense to an allegation of a defect made in a complaint filed under this subchapter that the defect is the result of abuse, neglect, or unauthorized modifications or alterations of the home.”


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Bardwell Texas

    No state license is required, however, general contractors must get permits at the local level. Separate boards license HVAC, and plumbing trades.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Tyler Area Builders Association
    Local # 4569
    1504 West Grande Blvd St A
    Tyler, TX 75703
    http://www.tylerareabuilders.com

    Big Country Home Builders Association
    Local # 4506
    4398 Crawford Dr
    Abilene, TX 79602
    http://www.bigcountryhba.com

    Permian Basin Home Builders Association
    Local # 4540
    4305 N Garfield St Ste 224
    Midland, TX 79705
    http://www.pbhba.org

    East Texas Builders Association
    Local # 4542
    2023 Alpine Rd
    Longview, TX 75601
    http://www.easttexasbuilders.org

    El Paso Assn of Bldrs
    Local # 4527
    6046 Surety Dr
    El Paso, TX 79905
    http://www.elpasobuilders.com

    Builders Association of Greater Fort Worth
    Local # 4530
    70001 Blvd 26 Ste 323
    Fort Worth, TX 76180
    http://www.fortworthbuilders.org

    Forest Country Chapter
    Local # 4555
    PO Box 630983
    Nacogdoches, TX 75963



    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Bardwell Texas

    Contractual Liability Exclusion Bars Coverage

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

    Williams v. Athletic Field: Hugely Important Lien Case Argued Before Supreme Court

    Judge Okays Harmon Tower Demolition, Also Calls for More Testing

    New OSHA Fall Rules to Start Early in Minnesota

    Utah Construction Defect Claims Dependant on Contracts

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

    Homeowners Not Compelled to Arbitration in Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Lien Law Unlikely To Change — Yet

    Florida Contractor on Trial for Bribing School Official

    Negligent Construction an Occurrence Says Ninth Circuit

    Construction Defects Lead to Demolition of Seattle’s 25-story McGuire Apartments Building

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

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

    Construction Defect Case Not Over, Despite Summary Judgment

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

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

    Window Manufacturer Weathers Recession by Diversifying

    Statute of Repose Dependant on When Subcontractors Finished

    Ohio Court of Appeals Affirms Judgment in Landis v. Fannin Builders

    Virginia Chinese Drywall and pollution exclusion

    Australian Developer Denies Building Problems Due to Construction Defects

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

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

    Architect Not Liable for Balcony’s Collapse

    Foundation Arbitration Doesn’t Preclude Suing Over Cracks

    Legislatures Shouldn’t Try to Do the Courts’ Job

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

    Condominium Communities Must Complete Construction Defect Repairs, Says FHA

    No Resulting Loss From Deck Collapsing Due to Rot

    Construction Upturn in Silicon Valley

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

    South Carolina “occurrence” and allocation

    Granting Stay, Federal Court Reviews Construction Defect Coverage in Hawaii

    Homeowners May Not Need to Pay Lien on Defective Log Cabin

    BHA Expands Construction Experts Group

    Ohio Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Coverage for Construction Defects Barred by Business Risk Exclusions

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

    Building Boom Leads to Construction Defect Cases

    Plans Go High Tech

    Late Filing Contractor Barred from Involving Subcontractors in Construction Defect Claim

    Water Drainage Case Lacks Standing

    Boston’s Tunnel Project Plagued by Water

    California Bill Would Notify Homeowners on Construction Defect Options

    Continuous Trigger of Coverage Adopted for Loss Under First Party Policy

    Official Tried to Influence Judge against Shortchanged Subcontractor

    Crane Dangles and So Do Insurance Questions

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

    Insurer Settles on Construction Defect Claim

    Court Clarifies Sequence in California’s SB800

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

    Hovnanian Increases Construction Defect Reserves for 2012

    Defective Grout May Cause Trouble for Bridges

    Construction Worker Dies after Building Collapse

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

    Contract Not So Clear in South Carolina Construction Defect Case

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

    A Call to Washington: Online Permitting Saves Money and the Environment

    Louisiana Politicians Struggle on Construction Bills, Hospital Redevelopment

    AFL-CIO Joins in $10 Billion Infrastructure Plan

    No “Special Relationship” in Oregon Construction Defect Claim

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

    Safer Schools Rendered Unsafe Due to Construction Defects

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

    Homeowner Has No Grounds to Avoid Mechanics Lien

    Virginia Homebuilding Slumps After Last Year’s Gain

    Safety Officials Investigating Death From Fall

    More Charges in Las Vegas HOA Construction Defect Scam

    Instant Hotel Tower, But Is It Safe?

    Construction Workers Unearth Bones

    Orange County Home Builder Dead at 93

    Home Sales Still Low, But Enough to Spur Homebuilders

    Lockton Expands Construction and Design Team

    Federal Judge Dismisses Insurance Coverage Lawsuit In Construction Defect Case

    Insurer Able to Refuse Coverage for Failed Retaining Wall

    Sometimes It’s Okay to Destroy Evidence

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

    Massachusetts Couple Seek to Recuse Judge in Construction Defect Case

    Kansas Man Caught for Construction Scam in Virginia

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

    Senate Committee Approves Military Construction Funds

    Construction Bright Spot in Indianapolis

    Construction Defect Litigation at San Diego’s Alicante Condominiums?

    Certificate of Merit to Sue Architects or Engineers Bill Proposed

    Defective Shingle Claims Valid Despite Bankruptcy

    Alabama “occurrence” and subcontractor work exception to the “your completed work” exclusion

    Can Negligent Contractors Shift Blame in South Carolina?

    Bill Seeks to Protect Legitimate Contractors

    Court finds subcontractor responsible for defending claim
    Corporate Profile

    BARDWELL TEXAS CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 5500 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Bardwell, Texas Construction Expert Witness Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Bardwell'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.

    Bardwell Texas general contracting eifs expert witnessBardwell Texas general contracting engineering consultantBardwell Texas general contracting architectural engineering expert witnessBardwell Texas general contracting civil engineering expert witnessBardwell Texas general contracting construction cost estimating expert witnessBardwell Texas general contracting construction scheduling expert witnessBardwell Texas general contracting multi family design expert witnessBardwell Texas general contracting hospital construction expert witnessBardwell Texas general contracting construction experts
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Bardwell, Texas

    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…


    Insurers Reacting to Massachusetts Tornadoes

    August 11, 2011 — CDJ Staff

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

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

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

    Read the full story…


    Mortar Insufficient to Insure Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Case

    January 6, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The US District Court of Nevada issued a summary judgment in the case of R&O Construction Company V. Rox Pro International Group, Ltd. on December 19, 2011. The case involved the installation of stone veneer at a Home Depot location (Home Depot was not involved in the case). R&O’s subcontractor, New Creation Masonry, purchased the stone veneer from Arizona Stone. Judge Larry Hicks noted that “the stone veneer failed and R&O was forced to make substantial structural repairs to the Home Depot store.”

    Rox Pro asked the court for a summary judgment, which the court granted only in part. The court looked at two issues in the case, whether the installation instructions constituted a breach of implied warranty of merchantability, and whether there was a breach of an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.

    Judge Hicks found that there was a breach of implied warranty of merchantability. The instructions drafted by Real Stone and distributed by Arizona Stone were not sufficient for affixing the supplied stones, according to R&O’s expert, a claim the plaintiffs dispute. “Because there is an issue of material fact concerning the installation guidelines, the court shall deny Arizona Stone’s motion for a summary judgment on this issue.”

    On the other hand, the judge did not find that the instructions had any bearing as to whether R&O bought the stone, since the stone was selected by the shopping center developer. This issue was, in the view of the judge, appropriately dismissed.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Construction Defect Claims

    February 10, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The insurer unsuccessfully moved for summary judgment, contending it had no obligation to defend two related underlying construction defect cases. Amerisure Ins. Co. v. R.L.Lantana Boatyard, Ltd., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2466 (S.D. Fla. Jan. 9, 2012).

    An engineering report noted design construction defects and deficiencies in visible, physical improvements at The Moorings at Lantana Condominium. In two lawsuits, The Moorings sued the developer, R.L. Lantana Boatyard ("RLLB"), and the contractor, Current Builders of Florida.

    Current Builders was insured by Amerisure. RLLB was named as an additional insured under the Amerisure policy.

    Read the full story…

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


    Background Owner of Property Cannot Be Compelled to Arbitrate Construction Defects

    November 7, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    In Truppi v. Pasco Engineering, John Quattro sued Property Management Contractors, Inc. over construction defects in William Truppi’s home. All parties are named in the suit. The California Court of Appeals ruled that Property Management Contractors, Inc. (PMCI) could not compel Mr. Quattro to arbitration.

    The background of the case involves two houses built in Encinitas, California by PCMI: one for Mr. Truppi at 560 Neptune, and one for Mr. Quattro at 566 Neptune. Both contracts contained an arbitration provision. Mr. Quattro signed the contract for his residence and Mr. Truppi signed the other. Mr. Quattro then sued PCMI and its principal, William Gregory. Mr. Quattro claimed to be the true contracting party for the 560 Neptune residence and a third party beneficiary of the contract Mr. Truppi signed, and stated that PCMI was aware of this.

    PCMI in a demurrer stated that Quattro “had only a ‘prospective beneficial interest in the property upon its eventual sale or lease.’” Mr. Quattro amended his complaint to account for the issues raised by PCMI. The court rejected PCMI’s demurrer to the amended complaint.

    Finally, PCMI and Gregory asserted that Quattro was “not the real party in interest” and could not sue. PCMI continues to assert that Quattro lacks standing, but their attorney sent Quattro an e-mail stating, “While my client disputes that you are a party, and that you lack standing to assert the claim, to the extent you do so I believe you are obligated to proceed by way of arbitration.”

    The court did not cover the issue of Quattro’s standing in the case, only if he could be compelled to arbitration. The court affirmed the lower court’s finding that Quattro could not be compelled to arbitrate the construction defect claim as neither he nor Gregory signed the contract in an individual capacity. Further, the court noted that PCMI and Gregory “denied the existence of an agreement between themselves and Quattro on the 560 contract,” and cannot compel arbitration on a non-existent agreement. And while non-signatories can, in some situations be compelled to arbitrate, the court found that “these cases are inapplicable because here they seek to have the alleged third party beneficiary (Quattro) compelled by a nonsignatory (Gregory).” The arbitration clause in question “expressly limited its application to persons or entities that signed the 560 contract.”

    As Mr. Quattro was not a signatory to that agreement, the court found that he could not be held to its arbitration provision.

    Read the court’s decision…


    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…


    California Lawyer Gives How-To on Pursuing a Construction Defect Claim

    September 13, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    On his recently started blog, Harry Kaladjian writes about construction defect litigation in California. He notes that after taking possession, homeowners sometimes notices problems such as “slab cracks in the garage, water leaking through the ceiling, warped floors, improper framing, cracking stucco, etc.” He goes on to note that once that happens, there are series of things homeowners must do.

    The first is to be concerned about the statute of limitations. Then, “once it has been established that defects exist, the homeowner must refer to the ‘Right to Repair Act’ and ‘Calderon Procedures.’” These, he notes set out the “pre-litigation procedures prior to filing a lawsuit.”

    Read the full story…


    Plans Go High Tech

    April 25, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    One construction executive described it as “the wave of the future.” What is it? Accessing building plans on an iPad. According to an article in MacWorld, several companies are now offering solutions to distribute and update construction plans on iPads. Changes to plans and notes can be distributed quickly through cloud computing.

    Alan Dillon, a senior superintendent at DPR Construction told MacWorld, “I can take my iPad into the field and have my whole set of drawings.” He described a set of drawings for a large construction project as “five or six inches thick.” Danielle Douthet, of Level 10 Construction said it “can help everyone be on the same page more quickly, and make sure that everybody is working off the most current set of documents.”

    And it’s not just building plans. Other firms offer building management applications designed to be taken into the field on mobile devices.

    Read the full story…


    Demand for Urban Living Leads to Austin Building Boom

    August 16, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The New York Times reports that Austin is undergoing a building boom as a high-tech firms, including Facebook and Google, have moved into the downtown area. With them, comes a need for more apartment buildings and more retail space. Mike Kennedy, the president and chief executive of an Austin real estate firm, told the Times “the office space was here, the housing came, and retail is arriving last to the scene.” Currently, two large projects that will add about 500 apartment units is underway, including a 222-unit, 18-story building, and another that will contain 277 units. Apartment occupancy in Austin is at ninety-seven percent.

    Developers also have hotels and more office space planned. The area has about 6,000 hotel rooms with an additional 2,000 planned, but events in Austin can bring in more people than the city’s 30,000 hotel rooms can accommodate. Office space is eighty-eight percent occupied, and a lack of office space could cause firms to look elsewhere.

    Read the full story…


    Construction Defect Not Occurrences, Says Hawaii Court

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Some insurers in Hawaii have made it clear that they will be covering construction defects, despite a court ruling concluding that defects are not occurrences, under Hawaii law. The case, heard by Hawaii’s Intermediate Court of Appeals found that “breach-of-contract claims based on allegations of shoddy performance are not covered under CGL policies and that tort-based claims derivative of such breach of contract claims also are not covered.”

    Writing in Business Insider, Michael Bradford notes that the case, Group Builders Inc. and Tradewind Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Admiral Insurance Co., involved improperly installed insulation at the Hilton Hawaiian Village’s Kalia Tower. Hilton was forced to close 21 floors due to extensive mold in guest rooms. Although the court did recognize this property damage, they did not feel it triggered insurance coverage, noting that if disputes over the quality of work were covered, CGL policies would become professional liability policies or performance bonds.

    One critic of the decision, Warren C. Perkins, the risk manager at Boh Bros. Construction of New Orleans, noted that under the decision, “it doesn’t matter what the policy says and there is no need to investigate the policy wording.”

    Read the full story…


    Green Buildings Could Lead to Liabilities

    March 28, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Attempts to build “green,” reducing energy costs and increasing the use of sustainable building materials, may lead to more lawsuits, according to a report issued by the British Columbia Construction Association. The report warned those who were going to build green look into the implications. The report looked at the result of green building practices and requirements adopted in the United States.

    The report warns that “the use of novel, less harmful building material or new construction techniques may give rise to liability due to: contractor inexperience with installation; lack of long-term evaluation of green materials; lack of understanding of how new building materials may impact existing traditional building systems; or warranties provided unintentionally about the durability or effectiveness of unproven materials or techniques.”

    Manley McLachlan, president of the BCAA noted that they are aware of “legal action around the performance of the buildings,” noting that while fast-growing trees help toward LEED certification, their wood is more prone to mold. He also felt that low-VOC paints needed more testing to prove their durability as exterior finishes.

    Read the full story…


    Home Builder Doesn’t See Long Impact from Hurricane

    November 7, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    No one needs to tell Toll Brothers about the impact of Hurricane Sandy. The Wall Street Journal reports that the home building company lost power as a result of the storm. Martin Connor, the company’s CFO, told the Journal that he did not expect the hurricane to have a big effect on sales. Luckily for the company, many of its large projects are either sufficiently completed to provide shelter or too early in the process to be affected by the storm. “This type of weather event has limited impact on the market. It may move settlements later, and may defer people a weekend or two until they go out shopping. But it doesn’t have a long impact.”

    Read the full story…


    Underpowered AC Not a Construction Defect

    November 7, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    After buying a home in Louisiana, Mike Gines determined that the home’s air conditioning unit was insufficient to maintain an appropriate temperature. He contacted the home builder, D.R. Horton, Inc., which worked with the air conditioning installer, Reliant Heating & Air Conditioning, in order to repair the system. When the problems persisted, Gines filed a class action petition against Horton and Reliant in state court. Horton and Reliant moved the case to the federal courts, whereupon Gines asserted the defendants were in violation of the Louisiana New Home Warranty Act (NHWA). Horton stated that the claim under the NHWA was invalid, because Gines had not alleged actual physical damage to his home.

    The district court granted Horton’s motion to dismiss. Gines sought a reversal from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and sought to have two questions of state law addressed by the Louisiana Supreme Court.

    The district court ruled that the NHWA was the “sole remedy under Louisiana law for a purchaser of a new home with construction defects. Gines argued that court erred in this, but also conceded that this was the conclusion of the Louisiana Supreme Court.

    Further, Gines argued that a provision in the NHWA that allows the inclusion of construction defects that do not cause damage was satisfied by paragraph 6 of the contract. The court noted that Gines did not attach a copy of the contract to either the original or amended complaint, and so the court does not need to address these claims. However, the court cautioned that if a copy had been included, they still would have rejected the claim, as “the cited language does not indicate a waiver of the physical damage requirement.” They also note that “paragraph 13 of the contract shows that Gines was aware to the absence of any such waiver in the contract.”

    The court concludes that “the moral of this story is that in order to avoid the harsh result that has obtained here, the buyer of a newly constructed home in Louisiana should seek to obtain in the contract of sale an express waiver of the actual damage requirement of the NHWA.” The appeals court affirmed the decision of the circuit court and denied the application to certify questions to the Louisiana Supreme Court.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Pipes May Be Defective, But Owners Lack Standing

    September 13, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The United States District Court in Minnesota has determined that Steven and Cecilia Thundander cannot make a class-action claim against Uponor, Inc. over the plumbing in their home, as they do not have Article III standing. In this situation, the alleged defect is that Uponor made fraudulent claims that the pipes met National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) standards for use in potable water systems. Uponor submitted samples of other pipes, and their substitution was discovered when the NSF made an inspection of the manufacturing facility. The court noted that “the Thunanders contend that Uponor failed to inform homeowners, plumbers and consumers that it had been selling pipe that failed to meet NSF toxicity requirements at the time of sale and installation.”

    The Court noted that the Thunanders have not tested their piping to determine if they “demonstrate toxicity or lack of compliance with the NSF 61 standards,” noting also that the Complaint seeks to require Uponor to instruct the plaintiffs on “how to test the piping and water to determine the level of risk.” Lacking testing, the Court could not find that the Thundanders have defective pipes. The Court found that the “Plaintiffs have failed to adequately plead an injury in fact sufficient to confer standing as to their product liability claims.”

    The Court also concluded that it could not determine if the Plaintiff’s warranty actions could not be applied, as they “have failed to allege a plausible defect.” Even in the presence of a defect, the Court noted that more than eight years had passed before the filing of the suit, when the warranties under both Indiana and Minnesota law have a four-year statute of limitations. The Court also rejected the Thunanders tort claims, once again because “Plaintiffs have not tested their pipes,” noting that “a tort requires the existence of an injury.”

    In conclusion, Judge Nelson rejected the entirety of the complaint, granting the motions to dismiss by the defendants. However, despite the problems with the Thunanders’ claims, she found that they were not “patently frivolous or groundless.” Therefore, she denied attorney fees requested by one of the defendants.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Town Files Construction Lawsuit over Dust

    August 16, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Washington Township in Ohio has filed a lawsuit against Underground Utilities for their handling of construction fill on a road project. The City of Mansfield had hired the firm to improve road safety. The lawsuit is over the company’s actions in processing soil for fill, which they are doing on three vacant lots that are zoned for residential use. Washington Township Trustee Jack Butler told the Mansfield Journal that “what brought the lawsuit to a head was the fact that the contractor did not control the dust.” Subsequent receiving notices of zoning violations, the company began to move its operation to another site.

    Read the full story…


    Was Jury Right in Negligent Construction Case?

    September 30, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Yes, said the South Carolina Court of Appeals in Pope v. Heritage Communities, Inc. Heritage Communities developed Riverwalk, a community in South Carolina. During the earlier trial, HCI “conceded that construction defects existed at Riverwalk, and repairs needed to be made.” The trial court found that the construction was negligent, awarding the property owners association $4.25 million in actual damages and $250,000 in punitive damages, with the class of owners awarded $250,000 in actual damages and $750,000 in punitive damages. HCI appealed on nine issues. All were rejected by the appeals court.

    The court rejected HCI’s claim that the judge’s instruction to the jury suggested to the jury that “the court had already determined that Appellants were willful, wanton, and reckless.” But here, the appeals court found “no reversible error.”

    The general contractor for Riverwalk was BuildStar. Off-site management and sale were managed by Heritage Riverwalk, Inc., which also owned title to the property. Both these companies were owned by Heritage Communities, Inc. During the trial, an HCI employee testified that “the three corporations shared the same officers, directors, office, and telephone number.” The trial court found that the three entities were amalgamated. This was upheld by the appeals court.

    Nor did the appeals agree with the HCI that the trial court had improperly certified a class. The owners were seen as properly constituting a class. Further, the court held that the property owners’ losses were properly included by the trial court. HCI objected at trial to the inclusion of evidence of subsequent remedial measures, however, as they did not object that it was inadmissible, the issue could not be addressed at appeal.

    HCI argued on appeal that the trial court should not have allowed evidence of defects at other HCI developments. The appeals court noted that “the construction defects at the other HCI developments were substantially similar to those experienced by Riverwalk.”

    The court additionally found that the negligence claims, the estimated damages (since full damage could not be determined until all defective wood was removed), and the award of punitive damages were all properly applied.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Virginia Homebuilding Slumps After Last Year’s Gain

    June 19, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    As of May, only 61 residential construction permits have been issues in Roanoke County, Virginia, leaving officials doubtful that this year will meet last year’s mark of 179 permits. Residential construction was at its highest in the county in 2004. The worst year since then was 2009, when the county issued 143 permits. The county is in the western end of the state, near the border with West Virginia, and far from the D.C. metropolitan area.

    Arnold Covey, the Director of Community Development for the county said that “it may be until 2014 before we really see a difference. The article by WDBJ7.com notes that a “key part” of the county budget comes from real estate.

    Read the full story…


    Local Government Waives Construction Fees to Spur Jobs

    June 19, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Warren Township in New Jersey has waived building and electrical permit fees, up to $5,000, for businesses that create at least five new jobs. The fee reductions are available for construction in areas zones under various designations. Buildings that have received a zoning variance are not eligible. The Echoes-Sentinel notes that other towns in Somerset County, New Jersey have adopted similar ordinances.

    Read the full story…