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

    Virginia Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: (HB558; H 150; §55-70.1) Warranty extension applicable to single-family but not HOAs: in addition to any other express or implied warranties; It requires registered or certified mail notice to "vendor" stating nature of claim; reasonable time not to exceed six months to "cure the defect".


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Honaker Virginia

    A contractor's license is required for all trades. Separate boards license plumbing, electrical, HVAC, gas fitting, and asbestos trades.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Peninsula Housing & Builders Association
    Local # 4844
    760 McGuire Pl
    Newport News, VA 23601
    http://peninsulahousing.org/

    Home Builders Association of Southside VA
    Local # 4863
    10300 Corporate Road
    Petersburg, VA 23805
    http://www.hbaofsouthside.com

    New River Valley Home Builders Association
    Local # 4837
    PO Box 2010
    Christiansburg, VA 24068
    http://www.nrvhba.com

    Roanoke Regional Home Builders Association
    Local # 4881
    1626 Apperson Dr
    Salem, VA 24153
    http://www.rrhba.com

    Tidewater Builders Association
    Local # 4854
    2117 Smith Ave
    Chesapeake, VA 23320
    http://www.tbaonline.org

    Home Builders Association of Central VA
    Local # 4827
    20334 Timberlake Rd Ste 3
    Lynchburg, VA 24502
    http://www.HBACV.org

    Builders & Associates of Southern VA
    Local # 4829
    PO Box 10178 Ste 28
    Danville, VA 24543



    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Honaker Virginia

    Ohio Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    South Carolina Law Clarifies Statue of Repose

    Destruction of Construction Defect Evidence Leads to Sanctions against Plaintiff

    Construction Firm Sues City and Engineers over Reservoir Project

    Ensuing Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

    HOA Has No Claim to Extend Statute of Limitations in Construction Defect Case

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

    Safety Officials Investigating Death From Fall

    Faulty Workmanship Exclusion Does Not Bar Coverage

    San Diego Construction Defect Claim Settled for $2.3 Million

    Continuous Trigger of Coverage Adopted for Loss Under First Party Policy

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

    Insurer Not Liable for Construction Defect Revealed by Woodpecker

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

    Insurance Firm Defends against $22 Million Claim

    Policyholder Fails to Build Adequate Record to Support Bad Faith Claim

    Windows and Lawsuits Fly at W Hotel

    Mobile Home Owners Not a Class in Drainage Lawsuit

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

    Good and Bad News on Construction Employment

    Window Manufacturer Weathers Recession by Diversifying

    Insurers Reacting to Massachusetts Tornadoes

    Construction Upturn in Silicon Valley

    Damage During Roof Repairs Account for Three Occurrences

    Judge Kobayashi Determines No Coverage for Construction Defect Claim

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

    Green Buildings Could Lead to Liabilities

    West Hollywood Building: Historic Building May Be Defective

    Water District Denied New Trial in Construction Defect Claim

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

    Plaintiff Not Entitled to Further Damages over Defective Decking

    Underpowered AC Not a Construction Defect

    Going Green for Lower Permit Fees

    Housing Prices Up through Most of Country

    Micropiles for bad soil: a Tarheel victory

    Restitution Unlikely in Las Vegas Construction Defect Scam

    Florida Appeals Court Rules in Favor of Homeowners Unaware of Construction Defects and Lack of Permits

    AFL-CIO Joins in $10 Billion Infrastructure Plan

    New Jersey Court Rules on Statue of Repose Case

    Businesspeople to Nevada: Revoke the Construction Defect Laws

    Save A Legal Fee? Sometimes You Better Talk With Your Construction Attorney

    Montrose Language Interpreted: How Many Policies Are Implicated By A Construction Defect That Later Causes a Flood?

    Local Government Waives Construction Fees to Spur Jobs

    Construction Defect Journal Marks First Anniversary

    Contractual Liability Exclusion Bars Coverage

    Statute of Repose Dependant on When Subcontractors Finished

    Arizona Homeowners Must Give Notice of Construction Defect Claims

    Lien Claimant’s Right to Execute against Bond Upheld in Court of Appeals

    High School Gym Closed by Construction Defects

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

    2011 Worst Year Ever for Home Sales

    California Construction Bill Dies in Committee

    Is There a Conflict of Interest When a CD Defense Attorney Becomes Coverage Counsel Post-Litigation?

    Ensuing Loss Found Ambiguous, Allowing Coverage

    Virginia Homebuilding Slumps After Last Year’s Gain

    Contractor Convicted of Additional Fraud

    State Farm Too Quick To Deny Coverage, Court Rules

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

    Ohio Adopts Energy-Efficient Building Code

    Florida Law: Defects in Infrastructure Improvements Not Covered in Home Construction Warranties

    One to Watch: Case Takes on Economic Loss Rule and Professional Duties

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

    Des Moines Home Builders Building for Habitat for Humanity

    Louisiana Politicians Struggle on Construction Bills, Hospital Redevelopment

    Fire Reveals Defects, Appeals Court Affirms Judgment against Builder

    Harmon Hotel Construction Defect Update

    Las Vegas Home Builder Still in Bankruptcy

    Florida trigger

    BHA Expands Construction Experts Group

    Insurer Must Cover Construction Defects Claims under Actual Injury Rule

    Texas covered versus uncovered allocation and “legally obligated to pay.”

    School District Marks End of Construction Project by Hiring Lawyers

    Water Damage Covered Under Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    Loose Bolts Led to Sagging Roof in Construction Defect Claim

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

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

    Exact Dates Not Needed for Construction Defect Insurance Claim

    The Hidden Dangers of Construction Defect Litigation

    Preparing For the Worst with Smart Books & Records

    Australian Group Seeks Stronger Codes to Combat Dangerous Defects

    An Upward Trend in Commercial Construction?

    Former New York Governor to Head Construction Monitoring Firm

    No Coverage Under Ensuing Loss Provision

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

    Negligent Construction an Occurrence Says Ninth Circuit

    Construction Defects Are Occurrences, Says South Carolina High Court

    New Washington Law Nixes Unfair Indemnification in Construction Contracts

    New Households Moving to Apartments

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

    Association May Not Make Claim Against Builder in Vermont Construction Defect Case
    Corporate Profile

    HONAKER VIRGINIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Honaker, Virginia 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 Honaker'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.









    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Honaker, Virginia

    Construction Defects Leave Animal Shelter Unusable

    October 23, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Press Democrat reports that the Healdsburg Animal Shelter is proceeding in its lawsuit against the architect, general contractor, and subcontractors of its unfinished new facility. Shelter officials described the building as “effectively uninhabitable,” and the board has suggested that the building might have to be demolished. The chair of the shelter board told donors that “your investment is protected.”

    The defects in the building include cracked concrete slabs and gaps around windows. However, even without these defects, the shelter alleges that the architect failed to correct design flaws.

    Read the full story…


    Are Construction Defects Covered by Your General Liability Policy?

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Construction firms are finding that their insurers are denying construction defect claims and the courts are siding with the insurers, according to Kelly M. Gindele, writing in the Martindale-Hubble Legal Library. Ms. Gindele notes that when construction defect claims are not covered, firms can end up with “multi-million dollar claims” that it has to pay “out of its own pocket.” She notes that in Kentucky and Ohio, if “the insured’s work causes an unforeseen and unintended event to occur?Ķthere is not occurrence under the policy.” Further, if there is an occurrence, the court will “look for an exception to coverage.”

    She also notes that contractors may not hold sufficient coverage, either by limiting the amounts or the time. She notes that while “insurers generally try to limit coverage for defect claims to one year,” that “construction defects may not be found in a year’s time.”

    Ms. Ginele recommends that contractors “hire an insurance company with extensive experience in this field” and “independent legal counsel with insurance knowledge,” to avoid finding themselves “with limited or even no coverage when it needs it most.”

    Read the full story…


    Condo Owners Allege Construction Defects

    July 6, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Last November, mold problems were discovered at the Siena Condominiums in Montclair, New Jersey, which had been described by their developers as “an enclave of luxury in an urban village setting.” The owners have filed a lawsuit against Pinnacle Companies, Kohl Parnters, and Herod Development, seeking “compensatory damages, interest, reasonable attorney’s fee and costs, and for such other, further, and different relief as the Court may deem just and proper.”

    According to the article on Baristanet.com, an engineering report commissioned by the condominium association revealed many problems, including improperly installed windows and siding. The developers commissioned two engineering reports themselves and found evidence of water pounding on the roof. Despite these reports and repeated promises, no repairs have been made.

    Read the full story…


    Defective Shingle Claims Valid Despite Bankruptcy

    June 19, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Third Circuit Court has allowed claims to go forward against Owens Corning for making allegedly defective shingles. The shingles split, leading to leaking roofs. The building products manufacturer filed for bankruptcy in 2000, which “extinguished” claims against it. The company was facing millions in liabilities over asbestos lawsuits.

    The lawsuit was filed in 2009. The courts initially found the lawsuit timely, but the Third Circuit Court later applied determined the exposure stated before the bankruptcy. On appeal, the court has reversed this and is again allowing the suit to proceed.

    Read the full story…


    An Upward Trend in Commercial Construction?

    March 28, 2012 — Melissa Dewey Brumback, Construction Law North Carolina

    Year-end economic indicators demonstrate that private commercial construction may be increasing in 2012, primarily as demand grows for new projects built in the United States.

    According to an article in Businessweek, the Architecture Billings Index held at 52 in December, indicating a modest expansion in the market. The American Institute of Architects said that the commercial and industrial component of the number climbed to 54.1 in December, the highest in 10 months.

    The monthly survey of U.S.-based architecture firms is one of the main indicators of nonresidential construction, and these numbers suggest that modest improvement may be on the horizon.

    The information is confirmed by data from the Census Bureau that shows that spending on lodging, office, commercial and manufacturing buildings grew 8.2 percent in November to $9.2 billion from a year ago. These types of commercial and industrial projects are historically canaries in the mine and are usually the first part of the industry to improve as the economy expands.

    Read the full story…

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


    Lockton Expands Construction and Design Team

    July 19, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Lockton Companies, LLC, the largest privately held independent insurance broker, has announced that it is expanding its construction and design team with the hiring of Karen Erger and Tom Miller.

    Ms. Erger will provide professional liability practice management, loss prevention, contract and complex claims management consulting services to Lockton's architectural, engineering and construction clients in her role as Vice President, Director of Practice Management. Her background includes construction litigation at a leading construction law firm, professional liability claims defense and claims consulting for major professional liability underwriters.

    Miller joins Lockton as a Senior Vice President within the Design and Construction Unit. His role will be dedicated to serving the needs of engineering, architecture and construction firms performing services around the globe. He has spent more than 15 years concentrating on professional liability for design professionals and contractors in multiple roles. He previously managed the professional liability underwriting of one of the largest construction insurers and has developed numerous manuscript insurance products as well as focused on strategic planning to enhance business unit opportunities.

    Read the full story…


    Federal District Court Predicts Florida Will Adopt Injury In Fact Trigger

    October 23, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The U. S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida was confronted with determining whether Florida would follow the manifestation or injury in fact trigger in Axis Surplus Ins. Co. v. Contravest Constr. Co., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104502 (D. Fla. June 5, 2012).

    The homeowner's association sued the insureds for alleged negligent construction and development of individual dwelling units and common areas of their condominium. Due to this negligence, severe damage was caused by water intrusion. The Association's members only became aware of the defects through the retention of construction experts.

    The insured had CGL coverage with Axis, with policies issued from 2003 to 2007. Coverage was denied for the periods 2003-2004 and 2004-2005. Axis provided a defense under the policies issued for 2005-2006 and 2006-2007, but under a reservation of rights. Axis sought a declaration that it had no duty to defend or indemnify because the damage manifested before its policy periods.

    For coverage to exist, "property damage" must have "occurred" during Axis' policy period.

    Read the full story…

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


    Ambitious Building Plans in Boston

    November 18, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Although most are unlikely to change the Boston skyline, there are several large projects on the drawing boards. The site BostInnovation covered ten of them in a recent post. Downtown Boston will be the site of several of these large projects, including three towers to be added to the Christian Science Plaza, a 404-unit residential tower in the Theater District, and perhaps the largest of these projects, a 47-story tower to be built over Copley Plaza, which will tower over the adjacent buildings. None of the planned buildings will challenge the Hancock Tower’s 60 stories.

    Read the full story…


    Insurer Beware: Failure to Defend Ends with Hefty Verdict

    June 1, 2011 — Douglas Reiser in the Builders Counsel Blog

    Served with a lawsuit that you turned over to your insurer? Insurer refusing to defend you? Well, find some hope in this news. Washington’s IFCA has the claws to ensure that insurers perform their duties.

    Contractors heavily rely on the defense provisions of their Commercial General Liability (CGL) policies. In construction, a legal dispute can easily rear its head when you least expect it. Luckily, Washington registered contractors are required to maintain CGL insurance. That insurance often provides contractors with adequate legal defense in the event that they are sued.

    But, what if your insurer turns down the defense request? They might be staring at massive damages. A current Reiser Legal client, Australia Unlimited, Inc., recently won a large verdict against Hartford Insurance, after the insurer unreasonably denied their claim. The firm who represented Australia Unlimited Inc. in that case, Hackett Beecher and Hart, were successful in procuring a $5.43 Million verdict

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Douglas Reiser of Reiser Legal LLC. Mr. Reiser can be contacted at info@reiserlegal.com


    Former New York Governor to Head Construction Monitoring Firm

    September 13, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    David Paterson, who succeeded Eliot Spitzer as Governor of New York, has started a new venture after leaving the Governor’s office in construction integrity monitoring. WNYC reports that Paterson will be the majority owner of Icon Compliance Services, LLC, which will both conduct investigations and work with law enforcement officials. Paterson says that in government projects “often concessions are made for political reasons in the public sector and then you never really get a product that you paid for.”

    Paterson will be working with a former vice president of Bovis Construction, Brian Aryai, who is also a former U.S. Treasury Agent. Aryai said that “it is astounding that some of the fraud that has come to the surface in the recent past,” and describes it as “almost laughable they were not detected.” Aryai tipped federal prosecutors that Bovis had been over billing on projects for at least a decade.

    Read the full story…


    Mississippi exclusions j(5) and j(6) “that particular part”

    June 7, 2011 — CDCoverage.com

    In Lafayete Ins. Co. v. Peerboom, No. 3:10cv336 (S.D. Miss. June 2, 2011), claimant homeowner Peerboom hired insured contractor Absolute to raise Peerboom’s house two feet to avoid future flooding. While Absolute was raising the house, it fell, resulting in physical injury to the home. Peerboom sued Absolute for negligence, breach of contract, and fraud, seeking damages for the destruction of the home. Absolute’s CGL insurer Lafayette defended under a reservation of rights and filed a declaratory judgment action.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com


    Ceiling Collapse Attributed to Construction Defect

    May 19, 2011 — May 16, 2011 - CDJ Staff

    WSMV, Nashville reports that the ceiling collapse in a Franklin, Tennessee Kohl’s was attributed to a construction defect by fire officials. The officials noted that the ceiling was renovated at the time. No injuries were reported.

    The report notes that “inspectors were supposed to look at the renovations next week, but fire officials said that will have to be delayed until another time.”

    Read the full story…


    OSHA Extends Temporary Fall Protection Rules

    March 1, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    OSHA announced that its current rules on fall protection for residential construction will remain in place until September 15, 2012. The current measures became effective in June 2011. Under the new rules, falls must be prevented by fall protection measures unless the measures can be shown to be unfeasible or even hazardous.

    Under the extension of the temporary enforcement measures, contractors who ask for compliance assistance with OSHA are given top priority and penalties can be reduced. OSHA has conducted more than 1,000 outreach sessions on the new rules.

    Read the full story…


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

    May 26, 2011 — Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    On May 17, 2011, South Carolina passed legislation to combat the restrictive interpretation of what constitutes an "occurrence" under CGL policies. S.C. Code Ann. sec. 38-61-70.

    The legislation reversed a decision by the state's Supreme Court issued earlier this year. See Crossman Communities of North Carolina, Inc. v. Harleysville Mut. Ins. Co., 2011 W.L. 93716 (S.C. Jan. 7, 2011). Crossman had overruled an earlier decision by the South Carolina Supreme Court that holding that defective construction was an “occurrence.” Crossman, however, reversed course, holding that damages resulting from faulty workmanship were the “natural and probable cause” of the faulty work and, as such, did not qualify as an “occurrence.”

    Read the full story…

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


    One to Watch: Case Takes on Economic Loss Rule and Professional Duties

    June 28, 2011 — Douglas Reiser, Builders Counsel

    According to the Supreme Court of Washington Blog, The Supreme Court heard oral argument in Jackowski v. Hawkins Poe on Thursday, June 16, 2011. The court’s synopsis of the case can be found on the Washington State Court website.

    In short, two home purchasers brought a lawsuit against the home’s sellers, the sellers’ agent and the purchasers’ own agent, alleging claims of fraud, fraudulent concealment, negligent misrepresentation and breach of common law and statutory duties. The trial court dismissed the buyers’ claims on the basis of the economic loss doctrine and Division II reversed, opining that the ELR does not apply to professional duties. The Supreme Court will now look at applying the Independent Duty Doctrine established last year, and whether professional duties (those of the real estate agents) should be reviewed under a different light.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Douglas Reiser of Reiser Legal LLC. Mr. Reiser can be contacted at info@reiserlegal.com


    Avoid Gaps in Construction Defect Coverage

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The language may be standardized, but the way different states’ courts interpret it is not. That’s the problem discussed by William F. Knowles and Brendan Winslow-Nason in an article in Business Insurance. One of the major issue through the country is whether a construction defect claim and the resultant damage are an occurrence. Additionally, there are questions whether certain exclusions apply, such as “your work” or “your product” exclusions. They note that many courts “ agree that they are intended to exclude defective construction itself, while providing coverage for unintended consequences.” They further note that these are not the only insurance issues, “making it difficult for construction companies operating across state lines to ensure adequate coverage.”

    Their recommendations to contractors are that they pay careful attention to where they’ve done business and “if the states have issued decisions or if there is legislation in place address the scope of coverage under additional insured endorsements.” Additionally, they suggest determining whether a contractor can negotiate a choice of law provision in their policy. The conclude that “construction companies can take proactive steps to protect themselves by identifying the applicable states’ laws, determining whether insurance is adequate under those laws, and then taking steps to resolve any gaps in their coverage.”

    Read the full story…


    Destruction of Construction Defect Evidence Leads to Sanctions against Plaintiff

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Stating that the plaintiff’s actions have left the defendants in a situation where they “cannot properly defend the action,” a judge in the US District Court of New York has sanctioned the plaintiffs in Aktas v. JMC Dev. Co.

    The plaintiffs hired JMC Development and Stephen Jung, an architect, to renovate their vacation home in Adirnodack, New York. As work progressed, “due to disagreements regarding the completion date and payments for the project, the relationship began to deteriorate.” The plaintiffs hired George Villar as an owner’s representative who “testified that he deemed the workmanship to be ‘poor.’”

    Subsequently, the locks where changed on the home, preventing JMC from performing any additional work, after which drywall was removed, which Villar stated was so that “the engineer come and look at the framing.” Subsequently, Villar sent a letter to JMC stating that the work was “performed in an inadequate, negligent and un-professional manner.” Villar informed JMC that they were not to visit the property. Subsequently, the plaintiffs hired another firm. “Plaintiffs testified that the materials were ‘carted away’ and ‘thrown out.’”

    The plaintiffs filed a suit against JMC and others. JMC filed a motion requesting that the plaintiffs be sanctioned for their spoliation of evidence. The court noted that “the plaintiffs recognized that litigation was imminent,” and that they “had a duty to preserve the evidence. As all of JMC’s work was destroyed, there is no evidence of whether or not the work was defective. The court concluded that it will “issue an adverse inference charge that permits the jury to infer that the missing evidence was favorable to the defendants.”

    In conclusion, the court granted in part the spoliation sanctions. They granted JMC a summary judgment dismissing the plaintiffs’ claims of fraud.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Court Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Construction Defect Suit

    September 1, 2011 — CJD Staff

    The California Court of Appeals has upheld the denial of an anti-SLAPP motion in Claredon American Insurance Company v. Bishop, Barry, Howe, Haney & Ryder. This case was triggered by a water intrusion problem at a condominium complex, the Terraces at Emerystation, built and sold by Wareham Development Corporation. The insurer, Claredon, retained Risk Enterprise Management as the third party claims administrator. REM retained the law firm Bishop, Barry, Howe, Haney & Ryder. The construction defect case was settled in 2007 and the condo owners moved back by early 2008.

    Due to issues with the claims settlement, Claredon filed against REM for “professional negligence, indemnity, apportionment and contribution,” with a cross-complaint that the cross-defendants negligently defended the developer, Wareham.

    In response, the cross-defendants filed a motion to strike the cross-complaint under the anti-SLAPP statute. The trial court denied this motion and now this has been upheld by the appeals court.

    The court noted that “The fundamental thrust of the cross-complaint is not protected litigation-related speech and petitioning activity undertaken on another’s behalf in a judicial proceeding.”

    Read the court’s decision…