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

    Alabama Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Although there is case law precedent for right to repair, Title 6 Article 13A states action must be commenced within 2 years after cause and not more than 13 years after completion of construction.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Lower Peach Tree Alabama

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    South Alabama Home Builders Association
    Local # 0102
    PO Box 190
    Greenville, AL 36037


    Home Builders Association of Alabama
    Local # 0100
    PO Box 241305
    Montgomery, AL 36124
    http://www.hbaa.org

    Greater Montgomery Home Builders Association
    Local # 0164
    6336 Woodmere Blvd
    Montgomery, AL 36117
    http://www.gmhba.org

    Enterprise Home Builders Association
    Local # 0133
    PO Box 310861
    Enterprise, AL 36331


    Home Builders Association of Phenix City
    Local # 0172
    1808 Opelika Road
    Phenix City, AL 36867


    Home Builders Association of Dothan & Wiregrass Area
    Local # 0132
    PO Box 9791
    Dothan, AL 36304


    Lee Co Home Builders Association
    Local # 0136
    528 Lafayette Pl
    Auburn, AL 36830



    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Lower Peach Tree Alabama

    Can We Compel Insurers To Cover Construction Defect in General Liability Policies?

    Nebraska Man Sentenced for Insurance Fraud in Construction Projects

    Contractual Liability Exclusion Bars Coverage

    Tacoma Construction Site Uncovers Gravestones

    Injured Construction Worker Settles for Five Hundred Thousand

    Discovery Ordered in Nevada Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Nevada Senate Rejects Construction Defect Bill

    Virginia Homebuilding Slumps After Last Year’s Gain

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

    District Court Awards Summary Judgment to Insurance Firm in Framing Case

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

    West Hollywood Building: Historic Building May Be Defective

    Seven Former North San Diego County Landfills are Leaking Contaminants

    Exclusions Bar Coverage for Damage Caused by Chinese Drywall

    Homeowners Not Compelled to Arbitration in Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Nevada Construction Defect Lawyers Dead in Possible Suicides

    Construction Defects Not Occurrences under Ohio Law

    Construction Case Alert: Appellate Court Confirms Engineer’s Duty to Defend Developer Arises Upon Tender of Indemnity Claim

    Insurer Beware: Failure to Defend Ends with Hefty Verdict

    Insurance Policy Provides No Coverage For Slab Collapse in Vision One

    Cabinetmaker Exceeds Expectations as Conditions Improve

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

    Construction Defects: 2010 in Review

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

    Nevada Court Adopts Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    No Coverage for Property Damage That is Limited to Work Completed by Subcontractor

    Texas Construction Firm Files for Bankruptcy

    DA’s Office Checking Workers Comp Compliance

    Colorado “occurrence”

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

    Will They Blow It Up?

    Background Owner of Property Cannot Be Compelled to Arbitrate Construction Defects

    Nevada Bill Aims to Reduce Legal Fees For Construction Defect Practitioners

    Construction Bright Spot in Indianapolis

    Judge Kobayashi Determines No Coverage for Construction Defect Claim

    Illinois Court Determines Insurer Must Defend Negligent Misrepresentation Claim

    Florida trigger

    Construction Suit Ends with Just an Apology

    Certificate of Merit to Sue Architects or Engineers Bill Proposed

    Avoid Gaps in Construction Defect Coverage

    Court finds subcontractor responsible for defending claim

    US Courts in Nevada Busy with Yellow Brass

    Demand for Urban Living Leads to Austin Building Boom

    Construction Defect Not Occurrences, Says Hawaii Court

    Excess Carrier Successfully Appeals Primary Insurer’s Summary Judgment Award

    State Farm Too Quick To Deny Coverage, Court Rules

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

    Defective Grout May Cause Trouble for Bridges

    Nevada Assembly Sends Construction Defect Bill to Senate

    The Complete and Accepted Work Doctrine and Construction Defects

    Surveyors Statute Trumps Construction Defect Claim in Tennessee

    Homeowner may pursue negligence claim for construction defect, Oregon Supreme Court holds

    Lawsuit over Construction Defects Not a Federal Case

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

    Does the New Jersey Right-To-Repair Law Omit Too Many Construction Defects?

    School District Settles Construction Lawsuit

    OSHA Extends Temporary Fall Protection Rules

    Green Buildings Could Lead to Liabilities

    Residential Construction: Shrinking Now, Growing Later?

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Despite Construction Defects

    Public Relations Battle over Harmon Tower

    Builder to Appeal Razing of Harmon Tower

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

    Construction Defect Not an Occurrence in Ohio

    Renovation Contractors: Be Careful How You Disclose Your Projects

    Water Damage Covered Under Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    Condo Board May Be Negligent for not Filing Construction Defect Suit in a Timely Fashion

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

    Homeowners Sue Over Sinkholes, Use Cash for Other Things

    Defense for Additional Insured Not Barred By Sole Negligence Provision

    Construction Workers Face Dangers on the Job

    Liability policy covers negligent construction: GA high court

    Ensuing Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

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

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

    Homebuilders Go Green in Response to Homebuyer Demand

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

    Damage During Roof Repairs Account for Three Occurrences

    Virginia Chinese Drywall “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and number of “occurrences”

    Construction Defect Destroys Home, Forty Years Later

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

    Contractor Convicted of Additional Fraud

    Fourteen More Guilty Pleas in Las Vegas Construction Defect Scam

    Vegas Hi-Rise Not Earthquake Safe

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

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

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

    BHA Expands Construction Experts Group

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

    The Flood Insurance Reform Act May be Extended to 2016
    Corporate Profile

    LOWER PEACH TREE ALABAMA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

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

    Lower Peach Tree Alabama general contracting construction expert testimonyLower Peach Tree Alabama general contracting building code expert witnessLower Peach Tree Alabama general contracting consulting general contractorLower Peach Tree Alabama general contracting expert witness windowsLower Peach Tree Alabama general contracting expert witnesses fenestrationLower Peach Tree Alabama general contracting civil engineer expert witnessLower Peach Tree Alabama general contracting architectural engineering expert witnessLower Peach Tree Alabama general contracting architecture expert witnessLower Peach Tree Alabama general contracting engineering expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Lower Peach Tree, Alabama

    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…


    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


    Cleveland Condo Board Says Construction Defects Caused Leaks

    March 1, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    A Cleveland condo association has sued the developer of their building, claiming that construction defects resulted in water intrusion. The K&D Group, which still owns forty units in the 160-unit building, claim that it’s a maintenance issue that they’d like to see fixed, but it’s their responsibility as the developer. Doug Price, CEO of K&D calls it a “frivolous lawsuit.” He blames a “hostile board” and told The Plain Dealer “there’s simple maintenance that they refuse to do.”

    An outside company evaluated Stonebridge Towers. According to the condo board’s lawyer, Laura Hauser, the building design and construction are to blame for the water intrusion. Hauser said that the board’s “goal through this litigation is to find a resolution for the association, the building and the owners.”

    David Kaman, a Cleveland attorney not involved in the lawsuit, told the Plain Dealer that construction litigation in the Cleveland area had fallen off from 2007, but he sees it on the rise, which he attributes to cost-cutting on recently finished projects. “If an owner moves in and two years later the wallpaper needs to be replaced because the wall is leaking, that’s a construction defect.”

    Read the full story…


    District Court Awards Summary Judgment to Insurance Firm in Framing Case

    August 4, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    In the case of Continental Western Insurance Company v. Shay Construction Inc., Judge Walker Miller has granted a summary judgment against Shay Construction and their co-defendant, Milender White Construction Company.

    Shay was the framing subcontractor for Milender White on what the court described as “a major construction project in Grand County, Colorado.” Two of Shay’s subcontractors, Wood Source Inc. and Chase Lumber Company furnished materials, labor, and equipment to Shay. They subsequently sued for nonpayment and sought to enforce mechanic’s liens, naming both Shay and Milender as defendants. Milender White alleged that Shay had “breached its obligation under its subcontracts with Milender White.”

    Shay’s insurance provider, Continental Western, stated that its coverage did not include “the dispute between Shay, its subcontractors, particularly the cross claims asserted by Milender White.” Shay then sued Continental Western, alleging breach of contract and statutory bad faith.

    The court, however, has found with Continental Western and has granted them a summary judgment. They found “no genuine issue as to any material fact.” The judge did not side with Continental Western on their interpretation of the phrase “those sums that the insured becomes legally obligated to pay as damages.” The court found that the Colorado courts have not limited this to tort actions only. However, as Milender’s cross claim included claims of faulty workmanship on the part of Shay, Judge Miller found for Continental.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Homeowner Loses Suit against Architect and Contractor of Resold Home

    June 14, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The California Court of Appeals in the case of Kizor v. Architects ruled that Mr. Kizor could not make construction defect claims against the architect and contractor of his home, as the defects had caused significant damage to the former owners, and it was they, not Kizor, who could have asserted those claims.

    The background of the case was that John and Miranda Redig hired BRU Architects to design a home. During construction in 2000, they wrote to the roofing supplier complaining about leaks. The leaks were caulked, but the roof continued leaking during rains. The Redigs sold their house to Kizor in 2002, with an addendum to the sale contract protecting themselves from liability for further problems with the roof. “Seller has no responsibility for the condition of the roof and stucco and buyer absolves seller of any liability in connection therewith.”

    In 2006, Kizor sued the architects, contractor, and subcontractor. The defendants moved for summary judgment which was granted. Kizor appealed, and in this current court case, appeal was denied.

    Read the court’s decision


    Defective Drains Covered Despite Water Intrusion Exclusion

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The US District Court in Washington State has granted a summary judgment in Hiller v. Allstate Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. The Hillers bought a new home in Wenatchee, Washington and insured it with an “all risk” policy from Allstate. Subsequently, Mr. Hiller discovered that the carpet in the basement was saturated with water. Hiller notified Allstate who requested that he determine the source of the water intrusion. Hiller poured water into a downspout drain and found this caused water to leak into the home’s basement.

    Further investigation with the homes original excavation contractor revealed that “the end of the drain pipe was partially blocked by rocks and had been wrapped with fabric landscaping material.” Additionally, “a ‘T’ pipe installed at the foot of the drain was directing water toward the house’s concrete foundation.” Allstate denied the claim “under the policy’s surface water, subsurface water, inherent vice, and latent defect exlusions.” After the denial, Hiller “discovered that the foundation had not been treated with waterproof sealant and that several concrete form pins were still in place.”

    The court noted that “there is no genuine dispute about the cause of the claimed loss.” This left the court concluding that “the only relevant question for the purposes of the instant cross-motions for summary judgment is whether a loss caused by defective construction is covered under the Hillers’ ‘all risk’ insurance policy.” Under Washington’s “efficient proximate cause” rule, “where an insured risk itself sets into operation a chain of causation in which the last step may have en an excepted risk, the excepted risk will not defeat recovery.” The court found that a loss caused by defective construction is in fact covered under the policy, noting that “the policy does not contain an exclusion for defective construction.”

    The court concluded that the defective drain was not an inherent vice, as it “cannot properly be characterized as defects ‘inherent [in the] nature of the commodity which will cause it to deteriorate with a lapse of time.” Nor was it a latent defect, “one that could not have been discovered by inspection.” The court concluded that “both of the construction defects at issue could have been discovered by a reasonable inspection.”

    With these facts determined, the court found for the Hillers.

    Read the court»s decision…


    The Colorado Court of Appeals Rules that a Statutory Notice of Claim Triggers an Insurer’s Duty to Defend.

    October 23, 2012 — David M. McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell

    Gene and Diane Melssen d/b/a Melssen Construction (“Melssen”) built a custom home for the Holleys, during which period of time Melssen retained a CGL insurance coverage from Auto Owners Insurance Company. Soon after completion of the house, the Holleys noticed cracks in the drywall and, eventually, large cracks developed in the exterior stucco and basement slab. Thereafter, the Holleys contacted Melssen, the structural engineer, an attorney, and Auto-Owners, which assigned a claims adjuster to investigate the claim.

    In April 2008, the Holleys sent Melssen a statutory notice of claim pursuant to C.R.S. § 13-20-803.5 (“NOC”). In this NOC, the Holleys claimed approximately $300,000 in damages related to design and construction defects. The Holleys also provided a list of claimed damages and estimated repairs, accompanied by two reports from the Holleys’ consultant regarding the claimed design and construction defects. In June 2008, Melssen tendered the defense and indemnity of the claim to Auto-Owners. While Auto-Owners did not deny the claim at that time, it did not inspect the property or otherwise adjust the claim. Thereafter, in October 2008, Auto-Owners sent Melssen a letter denying coverage on the basis that the damage occurred outside of the applicable policy period.

    Ultimately, Melssen settled the claims against it for $140,000.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC. Mr. McLain can be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com


    Texas res judicata and co-insurer defense costs contribution

    March 23, 2011 — Original story by CDCoverage.com, March 23, 2011

    In Truck Ins. Exchange v. Mid-Continent Casualty Co., No. 03-08-00526-CV (Tex. App. 3d Aug. 27, 2010), insured contractor DCI was sued by the project owner seeking damages for defective construction. DCI tendered its defense to its CGL insurers Truck and Mid-Continent. Truck agreed to defend while Mid-Continent denied a defense. While the underlying suit was pending, Mid-Continent sued DCI, but not Truck, and obtained a judicial declaration of no duty to defend or indemnify DCI in the underlying suit. After settling the underlying suit, Truck sued Mid-Continent seeking contribution towards defense costs and indemnity payments. The state trial court entered summary judgment for Mid-Continent. The intermediate appellate court affirmed.

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com


    Contractor Liable for Soils Settlement in Construction Defect Suit

    February 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The California Court of Appeals ruled on January 9 in Burrow v. JTL Dev. Corp., a construction defect case in which houses suffered damage due to improperly compacted soil, upholding the decision of the lower court.

    Turf Construction entered into a deal with JTL to develop a parcel they acquired. A third firm, Griffin Homes, withdrew from the agreement “when a geotechnical and soils engineering firm reported significant problems with soil stability on 14 of the lots.” Turf Construction then took over compacting and grading the lots. Turf “had never compacted or graded a residential tract before.” Robert Taylor, the owner of Turf, “testified he knew there was a significant problem with unstable soils.”

    After homes were built, the plaintiffs bought homes on the site. Shortly thereafter, the homes suffered damage from soil settlement “and the damage progressively worsened.” They separately filed complaints which the court consolidated.

    During trial, the plaintiff’s expert said that there had been an inch and a half in both homes and three to five inches in the backyard and pool areas. “He also testified that there would be four to eight inches of future settlement in the next fifteen to twenty years.” The expert for Turf and JTL “testified that soil consolidation was complete and there would be no further settlement.”

    Turf and JTL objected to projections made by the plaintiffs’ soil expert, William LaChappelle. Further, they called into question whether it was permissible for him to rely on work by a non-testifying expert, Mark Russell. The court upheld this noting that LaChappelle “said that they arrived at the opinion together, through a cycle of ‘back and forth’ and peer review, and that the opinion that the soil would settle four to eight inches in fifteen to twenty years was his own.”

    Turf and JTL contended that the court relied on speculative damage. The appeals court disagreed, stating that the lower court based its award “on evidence of reasonably certain damage.”

    Turf also that it was not strictly liable, since it did not own or sell the properties. The court wrote that they “disagree because Turf’s grading activities rendered it strictly liable as a manufacturer of the lots.” The court concluded that “Turf is strictly liable as a manufacturer of the lots.”

    Judge Coffee upheld the decision of the lower court with Judges Yegan and Perren concurring.

    Read the court’s decision…


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

    May 24, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    In January, the California Court of Appeals ruled that an arbitration clause inserted in a development’s CC&Rs by the developer could not be enforced. The case, Villa Vicenza Homeowners Association v. Noble Court Development, involved a case in which, according to the opinion, “following the first sale Nobel controlled the board of directors of the Association and because the initial condominium buyers noticed defects in common areas and common facilities and did not believe Nobel had provided a reserve fund sufficient to repair the defects, the condominium owners brought a derivative action on behalf of the Association against Nobel.”

    The court concluded, “The use of CC&R's as a means of providing contractual rights to parties with no interest in or responsibility for a common interest development is also problematic from the standpoint of determining what if any consideration would support such third-party agreements. By their terms the CC&R's bind all successors, even those with whom a third party such as Nobel has never had any contractual relationship and to whom Nobel has not provided any consideration.” The court determined that “the trial court did not err in denying Nobel's motion to compel arbitration.”

    Read the court’s decision


    Georgia Law: “An Occurrence Can Arise Where Faulty Workmanship Causes Unforeseen or Unexpected Damage to Other Property”

    March 5, 2011 — By CDCoverage.com, March 5, 2011

    In American Empire Surplus Lines Ins. Co. v. Hathaway Development Co., Inc., No. S10G0521 (Ga. March 7, 2011), insured plumbing subcontractor Whisnant was sued by general contractor Hathaway seeking damages for costs incurred by Hathaway in repairing damage to property other than Whisnant’s plumbing work resulting from Whisnant’s negligently performed plumbing work on three separate projects. On one project, Whisnant installed a pipe smaller

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com


    Construction Worker Dies after Building Collapse

    November 18, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    A Bronx construction worker died when the pillars gave way in the basement where he was working. The two-story commercial building collapsed, burying Mr. Kebbeh under about six feet of rubble. The New York Times reports that firefighters dug him out with their bare hands. Mr. Kebbeh was taken to Jacobi Medical Center where he died. Two other construction workers escaped unharmed.

    Read the full story…


    Nevada Construction Defect Lawyers Dead in Possible Suicides

    March 28, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    A number of news sources have reported on the recent death of Nevada construction defect attorney, Nancy Quon. Ms. Quon was implicated in a recent scandal in which a group conspired to control homeowner associations in order to divert construction defect lawsuits to the members of the conspiracy.

    Ms. Quon was found dead in her bathtub. The details are still under investigations. She and her boyfriend were accused of a failed arson/suicide scheme in 2010. Ms. Quon survived an attempt to burn down her home. Subsequently, her boyfriend obtained some gamma-hydroxybutyric acid (GBH) for her, as part of another failed suicide attempt.

    Subsequent to Ms. Quon’s death, David Amesbury was found in California dead by hanging. Mr. Amesbury took a plea deal in the case, and he had admitted his role in providing legal and construction contracts to firms in the conspiracy. He was accused of fixing HOA elections.

    Read the full story…

    Read the full story…

    Read the full story…

    Read the full story…


    Insurer Must Defend Claims for Diminution in Value of Damaged Property

    June 19, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The insurer’s duty to defend a developer sued by purchasers of homes for damages for diminution in value of homes was at issue in Mid-Continent Cas. Co. v. Academy Dev., Inc., 2012 WL 1382459 (5th Cir. April 20, 2012).

    In the underlying action, plaintiffs alleged the developer knew when it sold the homes that the lake walls were falling and that water was leaking from the lakes onto adjacent home sites. They sought damages for diminution in the value of their homes resulting from the defective lakes. The action was tried in 2008, and the jury returned a verdict for the developer.

    Mid-Continent initially defended under a reservation of rights.

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

    Read the full story…


    California Posts Nation’s Largest Gain in Construction Jobs

    March 28, 2012 — CDJ Staff

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

    Read the full story…


    Another Colorado District Court Refuses to Apply HB 10-1394 Retroactively

    October 28, 2011 — David M. McLain, Colorado Construction Litigation

    In Martinez v. Mike Wells Construction Company, 09CV227, Teller County District Court Judge Edward S. Colt refused to apply C.R.S. § 13-20-808 retroactively to provide coverage for the underlying construction defect allegations. According to the recitation of facts in Judge Colt’s March 2011 order, Martinez contracted with Mike Wells Construction to serve as the general contractor for the construction of a home. At that time, Mike Wells Construction was insured through ProBuilders Specialty Insurance Company, RRG. Disputes arose between Martinez and Mike Wells Construction, resulting in Martinez ordering it off of the project in mid-November 2007 and terminating its right to work there by letter dated November 28, 2007.

    Mike Wells, the owner of the corporation, subsequently died. Martinez sued Mike Wells Construction in July 2009 for breach of contract and various claims relating to alleged defecting workmanship. Martinez provided notice of the suit to the special administrator of the probate estate. No answer having been filed, the court entered a default judgment against Mike Wells Construction and Martinez sought to garnish Mike Wells Construction’s ProBuilders insurance policy.

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC. Mr. McClain can be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com


    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…


    Instant Hotel Tower, But Is It Safe?

    March 28, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Broad Sustainable Building has leapfrogged in China’s construction boom by building a thirty-story hotel in just fifteen days in the city of Changsha. According to an article in the Los Angeles Times, most of the building was prefabricated, but most prefabricated buildings require a longer time for assembly. Broad claimed that it cut no corners on safety. However, Zhang Li, a Beijing architect, told the Times that “incredible speed also means incredible risk.”

    At the completion date, the interior was still partially finished. Some rooms were furnished, while others weren’t quite so ready. The hotel will be used to house clients who are visiting Broad and some of its employees.

    Broad called their process “the most profound innovation in human history” and predicted that soon a third of new buildings worldwide would be constructed this way. The company anticipates using the same process to build taller buildings, with hopes of eventually constructing a 150-story building.

    China is currently undergoing a building boom which Zhang attributed to a desire to catch up to the developed world. As a result of this boom, he noted that building inspections are often skipped in China to speed up building.

    Read the full story…