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

    Iowa Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Case law precedent


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Ledyard Iowa

    Licensing for plumbers and electricians is done at the local level. No state license for general contracting, however, all businesses must register with the state.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Northwest Iowa Home Builders Association
    Local # 1680
    PO Box 331
    Spirit Lake, IA 51360


    Dubuque IndependentChapter of National Associated Home Builders
    Local # 1640
    12230 Forest Meadow
    Dubuque, IA 52001


    Home Builders Association of NE Iowa
    Local # 1614
    PO Box 1857
    Waterloo, IA 50704


    Home Builders Association of Greater Siouxland
    Local # 1684
    3900 Stadium Drive
    Sioux City, IA 51106
    http://www.homebuildersassociationofgreatersiouxland.com

    Fort Dodge Chapter of National Associated Home Builders
    Local # 1656
    110 S 21st St
    Fort Dodge, IA 50501


    Home Builders Association of Gr Cedar Rapids Area
    Local # 1621
    350 Miller Rd Ste1
    Hiawatha, IA 52233
    http://www.crhba.org

    Home Builders Association of Ames
    Local # 1607
    PO Box 864
    Ames, IA 50010
    http://www.ameshomebuilders.com


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Ledyard Iowa

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

    Las Vegas Home Builder Still in Bankruptcy

    San Diego Construction Defect Claim Settled for $2.3 Million

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

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

    “Details Matter” is the Foundation in a Texas Construction Defect Suit

    Micropiles for bad soil: a Tarheel victory

    Virginia Chinese Drywall and pollution exclusion

    Official Tried to Influence Judge against Shortchanged Subcontractor

    Drug Company Provides Cure for Development Woes

    OSHA Cites Construction Firm for Safety Violations

    Pipes May Be Defective, But Owners Lack Standing

    David McLain to Speak at the CDLA 2012 Annual Conference

    Businesspeople to Nevada: Revoke the Construction Defect Laws

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

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

    Contractor Liable for Soils Settlement in Construction Defect Suit

    More Charges in Las Vegas HOA Scandal

    Continuous Trigger of Coverage Adopted for Loss Under First Party Policy

    Contractor Manslaughter? Safety Shortcuts Are Not Worth It

    Differing Rulings On Construction Defect Claims Leave Unanswered Questions For Builders, and Construction Practice Groups. Impact to CGL Carriers, General Contractors, Builders Remains Unclear

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

    Appeals Court Reverses Summary Judgment over Defective Archway Construction

    Residential Construction: Shrinking Now, Growing Later?

    Condo Owners Allege Construction Defects

    Amerisure Case to be Heard by Texas Supreme Court

    One World Trade Center Due to Be America’s Tallest and World’s Priciest

    Plaintiffs In Construction Defect Cases to Recover For Emotional Damages?

    Demand for Urban Living Leads to Austin Building Boom

    Who Is To Blame For Defective — And Still LEED Certified — Courthouse Square?

    Ohio subcontractor work exception to the “your work” exclusion

    Liability policy covers negligent construction: GA high court

    An Upward Trend in Commercial Construction?

    Toxic Drywall Not Covered Under Homeowner’s Policy

    Pictorial Construction Terminology Dictionary — A Quick and Helpful Reference

    Hilton Grand Vacations Defect Trial Delayed

    Harmon Tower Construction Defects Update: Who’s To Blame?

    High School Gym Closed by Construction Defects

    Lien Law Unlikely To Change — Yet

    New Safety Standards Issued by ASSE and ANSI

    Construction Spending Dropped in July

    New OSHA Fall Rules to Start Early in Minnesota

    South Carolina Contractors Regain General Liability Coverage

    Colorado “occurrence”

    Ensuing Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

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

    Housing Prices Up through Most of Country

    Tacoma Construction Site Uncovers Gravestones

    Construction on the Rise in Washington Town

    Colorado Statutes of Limitations and Repose, A First Step in Construction Defect Litigation

    Gilroy Homeowners Sue over Leaky Homes

    Repair of Part May Necessitate Replacement of Whole

    Pier Fire Started by Welders

    Badly Constructed Masonry Walls Not an Occurrence in Arkansas Law

    Largest Per Unit Settlement Ever in California Construction Defect Case?

    No Coverage Under Ensuing Loss Provision

    Another Las Vegas Tower at the Center of Construction Defect Claims

    Another Guilty Plea In Nevada Construction Defect Fraud Case

    Building Boom Leads to Construction Defect Cases

    All Risk Policy Only Covers Repair to Portion of Dock That Sustains Damage

    Builder Waits too Long to Dispute Contract in Construction Defect Claim

    Coverage Exists Under Ensuing Loss Provision

    Contractors with Ties to Trustees Reaped Benefits from LA Community College Modernization Program

    Virginia Homebuilding Slumps After Last Year’s Gain

    Connecticut Gets Medieval All Over Construction Defects

    Florida Contractor on Trial for Bribing School Official

    Construction Company Head Pleads Guilty to Insurance and Tax Fraud

    South Carolina “occurrence” and allocation

    Counterpoint: Washington Supreme Court to Rule on Resulting Losses in Insurance Disputes

    Unit Owners Have No Standing to Sue under Condominium Association’s Policy

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

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

    After Katrina Came Homes that Could Withstand Isaac

    Five Years of Great Legal Blogging at Insurance Law Hawaii

    Judge Okays Harmon Tower Demolition, Also Calls for More Testing

    Construction Defects Are Occurrences, Says Georgia Supreme Court

    Contractor Underpaid Workers, Pocketed the Difference

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Construction Defect Claims

    California Construction Bill Dies in Committee

    Arizona Court of Appeals Decision in $8.475 Million Construction Defect Class Action Suit

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

    Construction Defects and Contractor-Owners

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

    $5 Million Construction Defect Lawsuit over Oregon Townhomes

    California Supreme Court to Examine Arbitration Provisions in Several Upcoming Cases

    Consumer Protection Act Whacks Seattle Roofing Contractor

    New Buildings in California Soon Must Be Greener

    Know the Minnesota Statute of Limitations for Construction Defect Claims

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

    Park District Sues over Leaky Roof
    Corporate Profile

    LEDYARD IOWA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Ledyard, Iowa 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 Ledyard's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, as well as a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Ledyard Iowa general contracting architectural engineering expert witnessLedyard Iowa general contracting multi family design expert witnessLedyard Iowa general contracting consulting general contractorLedyard Iowa general contracting building expertLedyard Iowa general contracting construction expert testimonyLedyard Iowa general contracting concrete expert witnessLedyard Iowa general contracting hospital construction expert witnessLedyard Iowa general contracting window expert witnessLedyard Iowa general contracting construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Ledyard, Iowa

    Homebuilders Go Green in Response to Homebuyer Demand

    May 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    McGrawHill Construction reports that 17 percent of new homes and remodels in 2011 were done with green building practices. Their report estimates that by 2016, this will rise to 29 to 38 percent of the market for home construction and remodeling.

    Consumers see the green buildings as more desirable, particularly where they are more energy efficient. Two thirds of builders noted their customers were interested in features that would lower the energy use of their homes. Consumers also feel that green building materials are more durable and see green homes as higher quality.

    Read the full story…


    “Other Insurance” and Indemnity Provisions Determine Which Insurer Must Cover

    September 1, 2011 — Tred Eyerley, Insurance Law Hawaii

    A policy’s “other insurance” clause and a contractual indemnity provision were at the root for determining which of two insurers had to cover for injuries at a construction site. Valley Forge Ins. Co. v. Zurich Am. Ins. Co., 2011 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 76061 (N.D. Calif. July 14, 2011).

    Hathaway was the general contractor at a demolition and construction project. Hathaway was insured by Zurich. Reinhardt Roofing was the roofing subcontractor. Reinhardt was insured by Valley Forge under a policy which named Hathaway as an additional insured. The subcontract also required Reinhardt to indemnify Hathaway for acts or omissions arising from Reinhardt’s work unless Hathaway was solely negligent.

    Four of Reinhardt’s workers were injured when a canopy roof on which they were working collapsed. At the time of the accident, Hathaway’s on-site supervisor was inspecting a gap in the canopy roof, but did not order Reinhardt’s workers to stop working. 

    Read the full story…

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


    No Duty to Indemnify When Discovery Shows Faulty Workmanship Damages Insured’s Own Work

    November 7, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    Our post last week addressed the duty to defend when alleged faulty workmanship caused loss to property adjacent to where the insured was working. See Pamerin Rentals II, LLC v. R.G. Hendricks & Sons Constr., Inc., 2012 Wis. App. LEXIS 698 (Wis. Ct. App. Sept. 5, 2012) [post here]. Today, we report on recent developments in the same case where the court determined, despite earlier finding the insurer owed a defense, it had no duty to indemnify. Pamperin Rentals II, LLC v. R.G. Hendricks & Sons Constr., Inc., 2012 Wisc. App. LEXIS 793 (Wis. Ct. App. Oct. 10, 2012).

    Hendricks contracted to “prepare the site and supply and install concrete, tamped concrete, and colored concrete” at several service stations. The owner sued Hendricks, alleging the concrete “was defective and/or the work performed was not done in a workman-like manner and resulted in damages, and will require replacement.”

    Pekin Insurance Company agreed to defend Hendricks subject to a reservation of rights.

    Read the full story…

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


    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


    Texas “Loser Pays” Law May Benefit Construction Insurers

    June 7, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Under a new law, Texas HB 274, the Texas Supreme Court will be making rules for motions to dismiss and to expedite suits of less than $100,000. The law also contains two “loser pays” provisions. If a lawsuit is found dismissed for having “no basis in fact or law,” the losing side must pay attorney costs. The other provision caps award of attorney fees if plaintiffs reject settlement offers. Texas Lawyer quotes Houston attorney Mike Gallagher as saying this will affect “the practice of everyone who handles significant lawsuits.”

    Gregory Marcum, whose practice includes construction defect litigation, plans to contact insurance companies, as the new law may save them money. “It will definitely be a factor in the defense strategy for handling a case.” He notes that “any insurance carrier would want that done.”

    Marcum notes that the offer-of-settlement rules only apply when cases go to trial. “Almost all cases settle.”

    Read HB 274

    Read the full story…


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

    July 13, 2011 — Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    Although the insurer paid for some of the mold damage at the insured’s home, the Fifth Circuit eventually determined the homeowner’s policy did not cover such damage. Rooters v. State Farm Lloyds, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 12306 (5th Cir. June 15, 2011).

    The policy excluded loss caused by hail to personal property unless the direct force of wind or hail made an opening in the roof allowing rain to enter. Further, the policy excluded loss caused by mold or other fungi.

    In 1999, hail and rain caused water damage to the roof and interior of the residence. State Farm paid $19,000 to repair the roof. Another $1,800 was paid for repairs to the interior of the building. In 2002, the insured noticed black mold. State Farm issued an additional check for $4,402 for mold abatement.

    Read the full story…

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


    Tampa Condo Owners Allege Defects

    October 23, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Owners in the Bel Mare towers have filed a lawsuit alleging that the building have construction defects that could lead to problems during periods with high winds. The Tampa Bay Business Journal reports that the condo association has sued the developer, the general contractor, the architects, the structural engineers, and subcontractors.

    Read the full story…


    Vegas Hi-Rise Not Earthquake Safe

    July 12, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    If an earthquake hit Las Vegas, the Harmon Tower would not withstand it. A report from Weidlinger Associates told MGM Resorts that “in a code-level earthquake, using either the permitted or current code specified loads, it is likely that critical structural members in the tower will fail and become incapable of supporting gravity loads, leading to a partial or complete collapse of the tower.” The inspection came at the request of county officials, according to the article in Forbes.

    According to Ronald Lynn, directory of the building division in the county’s development services division, “these deficiencies, in their current state, make the building uninhabitable.” The county is concerned about risks to adjacent buildings.

    MGM Resorts is currently in litigation, separate from the stability issues, with Perini Corp., the builders of Harmon Tower.

    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…


    2011 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar – Recap

    June 1, 2011 — CDJ Staff
    Event exhibitors and sponsors contribute to an informative and engaging environment
    Event exhibitors and sponsors contribute to an informative and engaging environment

    This year’s meeting was the best yet for the industry-leading construction defect and claims event.

    This year’s seminar concluded on May 13, 2011 with the Construction Defect Community Charitable Foundation Golf Tournament, held at Strawberry Farms Golf Course.

    The Disneyland Hotel in Anaheim, California was the place where more than 1,500 attendees convened for two days of professional development activities and seminars that included CLE workshops and panel discussions of special interest to legal and insurance professionals concerned with construction defect and claims litigation. Key events included “Challenges for Experts in Construction Defect Claims and Litigation,” “Keeping Up with Construction Defect Coverage,” and “Tips for Avoiding the ‘Perfect Storm’ in Handling of Wrap Claims.”

    Supporting the golf tournament at the 15th hole
    Supporting the golf tournament at the 15th hole

    This year’s Ollie award was given to George D. Calkins II, Esq. The West Coast Casualty Jerrold S. Oliver Award of Excellence was named in honor of the late Judge Jerrold S. Oliver, and recognizes an individual who is outstanding or has contributed to the betterment of the construction community.

    In addition to being the most comprehensive professional development seminar in the area of construction defects, this year’s seminar was equally valuable as a networking opportunity for members of the industry. People participated in professional development events during the day and then continued networking in the evening at numerous social events. The Lawn Party as well as the legendary Wood, Smith, Henning & Berman events were very well attended. Additional valuable networking events were hosted by a number of industry professionals at the House of Blues, and Tortilla Joe’s.

    As of this writing the 2011, West Coast Casualty's Construction Defect Seminar has applied for or has already received the following continuing education accreditation in the following areas;

    Read the full story…

    For more information about next year’s event, visit West Coast Casualty.


    No Resulting Loss From Deck Collapsing Due to Rot

    July 10, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawwaii

    The Washington Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals’ decision that the ensuing loss provision provided coverage for a deck that collapsed due to rot and decay. Sprague v. Safeco Ins. Co. of Am., 2012 Wash. LEXIS 375 (Wash. May 17, 2012). Our prior post on the Court of Appeals’ decision is here.

    The Sprague’s home had a deck supported by six "fin walls." The fin walls were encased in a foam and stucco coating. Twenty years after they purchased the home, it was discovered that the fin walls were in an advanced state of decay. Engineers discovered that construction defects caused the supports to rot. The deck was in danger of imminent collapse.

    Safeco denied coverage. The all-risk policy did not exclude collapse, but did exclude coverage for losses causes by mold, wet or dry rot.

    Read the full story…

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


    Former Zurich Executive to Head Willis North America Construction Insurance Group

    March 1, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Insurance Journal reports that Sean McGroarty will be directing surety operations for their construction practice in North America. Previously, Mr. McGroarty was the senior vice president and head of international surety with Zurich Financial Services. He has also worked for Liberty Mutual Group and the St. Paul Companies.

    Mr. McGroarty will be leading a team of professionals offering brokerage services for contract and commercial surety.

    Read the full story…


    Nevada Senate Rejects Construction Defect Bill

    June 7, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The Las Vegas Sun reports that Assembly Bill 401, the construction defect bill, lost in a vote of 9 to 12. The measure extended the time for construction defect suits to be filed, awarded legal costs only to successful plaintiffs, and set a definition of construction defects. Two Democrats joined the Republicans in the Senate in defeating the bill.

    Read the full story…


    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…


    Texas Construction Firm Files for Bankruptcy

    December 20, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    A Texas construction firm, founded in 1937, filed for bankruptcy, bringing twenty-two projects to a sudden halt, and resulting in the loss of jobs for hundreds of employees. Ballenger Construction told its employees to go home, as it could not complete the jobs. In some cases, work will need to be done to ensure that the work sites do not cause public safety hazards.

    Read the full story…


    Ohio Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    March 28, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Construction Law Hawaii

    Charles and Valerie Myers hired Perry Miller to build their home. Myers v. United Ohio Ins. Co., 2012 Ohio App. LEXIS 287 (Ohio Ct. App. Jan. 26, 2012). After completion of the home, Miller was again hired to construct an addition which included a full basement, staircases, bathroom, bedroom, hallway and garage.

    After the addition was completed, one of the basement walls began to crack and bow. Miller began to make repairs, but eventually stopped working on the project. Other contractors were hired to make repairs, but further problems developed. A second basement wall began to bow and crack, allowing water into the basement. The wall eventually had to be replaced. Subsequently, the roof over the addition began to leak in five or six places before the drywall could be painted. The leaks caused water stains on the drywall and caused it to separate and tear. It was discovered the roof needed to be replaced.

    The Myers sued Miller and his insurer, United Ohio Insurance Company. The trial court ruled that the policy did not provide coverage for faulty workmanship, but did provide coverage for consequential damages caused by repeated exposure to the elements. United Ohio conceded liability in the amount of $2,000 to repair water damage to the drywall. United Ohio was also found liable for $51,576, which included $31,000 to repair the roof and ceiling and $18,576 to replace the basement wall.

    Read the full story…

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


    Faulty Workmanship may be an Occurrence in Indiana CGL Policies

    April 7, 2011 — April 7, 2011 Beverley BevenFlorez - Construction Defect Journal

    The question of whether construction defects can be an occurrence in Commercial General Liabilities (CGL) policies continues to find mixed answers. The United States District Court in Indiana denied the Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment in the case of General Casualty Insurance v. Compton Construction Co., Inc. and Mary Ann Zubak stating that faulty workmanship can be an occurrence in CGL policies.

    Judge Theresa L. Springmann cited Sheehan Construction Co., et al. v. Continental Casualty Co., et al. for her decision, ”The Indiana Supreme Court reversed summary judgment, which had been granted in favor of the insurer in Sheehan, holding that faulty workmanship can constitute an ‘accident’ under a CGL policy, which means any damage would have been caused by an ‘occurrence’ triggering the insurance policy’s coverage provisions. The Indiana Supreme Court also held that, under identically-worded policy exclusion terms that are at issue in this case, defective subcontractor work could provide the basis for a claim under a CGL policy.”

    As we reported on April 1st, South Carolina’s legislature is currently working on bill S-431 that would change the wording of CGL policies in their state to include construction defects. Ray Farmer, Southwest region vice president of the American Insurance Association spoke out against the bill. “CGL policies were never meant to cover faulty workmanship by the contractor,” he said. “The bill’s supplementary and erroneous liability provisions will only serve to unnecessarily impact construction costs in South Carolina.”

    Read the Opinion and order...
    Read the court’s ruling...
    Read the American Insurance Association statement...


    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…