| |
Home
> Practice
Areas > Construction Litigation |
| |
 |
| |
Construction Litigation |
< BACK
TO PRACTICE AREAS |
| WFB&M's broad experience in construction litigation includes the representation of owners, developers, general contractors, subcontractors, product manufacturers, material suppliers, architects, and engineers. Many of the construction matters also involve mold-related claims. Listed below is a limited sample of the types of clients represented and information about some of the cases handled: |
|
Owners
18 Hole golf course
17 Story commercial building
Winery
General Contractors
Condominium and single family developments
University housing
Design Professionals
Soil engineers
Structural engineers
Landscape architect
Courthouse
Museum
Custom homes
Oceanfront penthouse
Material Suppliers
Structural steel
Concrete
Ceramic Tile
Coatings
Lumber
Developers
300 Unit condo project
16 Story, 108 unit residential condominium complex
58 Single family tract development
|
|
|
Subcontractors
Mechanical/HVAC
Structural steel
Concrete
Electrician
Grader
Plumber
Plasterer
Roofer
Ceramic tile installer
Steel tube fencing installer
Framer
Waterproofer
Dewatering specialist
Product Manufacturers
Windows
Decorative coating
Waterproofing materials
Stone paving systems
Galvanized steel plumbing pipes
Heaters
Air Conditioners |
|
Sample of Litigation
A. VERDICTS/JUDGMENTS
Playa Pacific Townhomes
The firm represented the general contractor that constructed a 74 unit common interest development in Culver City, California. When the homeowners of the development began to complain of damages from water intrusion, we were able to negotiate a release of claims with the homeowners directly prior to any litigation. We then filed suit on behalf of our client seeking indemnity from the subcontractors. We were successful in recovering from the subcontractor parties nearly 100% of the amount paid out in settlement to the homeowners.
Brisas del Prado
This was a breach of contract case in which our client,
a general contractor, sought indemnity damages at trial
of over $100,000, that had been paid to resolve a claim
by homeowners of a townhouse project in Torrance, California.
The claim involved discolored kitchen cabinet door and
drawer fronts, supplied and installed by the defendant.
The kitchen cabinets prematurely discolored and the defendant,
after being placed on notice of the claim, refused to
replace the kitchen cabinet doors and drawer fronts. At
trial, we were successful in convincing the trier of fact
that our client, because of the strength of the indemnity
provision in the subcontract, was not required to prove
negligence and our client obtained a judgment for the
total amount it paid out to resolve the homeowners' claims.
In addition, it was awarded all costs, including attorneys'
fees, and prejudgment interest.
Oceanside Pump Station Relocation
The firm represented a dewatering sub-contractor who was not paid and was sued by a general contractor for over one-half million dollars for costs associated with the impact of an unknown confined aquifer located forty feet below the surface. The recharge resulting from the unknown aquifer prevented complete dewatering of an excavation during the construction of a below grade sewer pumping station. The job was stalled while solutions were being implemented ultimately costing the general contractor several hundred thousand dollars. After a two-week trial, the jury returned two verdicts in favor of our client. Our client was awarded every cent it was owed for its work, and the jury also awarded a defense verdict against the general contractor's suit for its extra costs. The jury was convinced by the client and the experts who testified that the confined aquifer was not the client's responsibility and that its wells performed adequately. The client was also awarded its attorney's fees and pre-judgment interest.
Single Family Homeowner
We represented the roofing contractor in a case brought by the homeowner of a large single family home who sued
for a wide variety of construction defect claims. The homeowner demanded over $300,000.00, including close to
$50,000.00 for roof issues. We took the matter to trial and defeated nearly every one of plaintiff's roofing claims.
The total verdict amount allocated by the jury to our client was just over $500.00.
We also represented another roofing contractor in a case brought by the owner of a large single family home. In that case, plaintiff alleged a variety of construction defects including roofing defects and water intrusion resulting in mold. Following a six-week jury trial in Alameda County, the jury awarded $639,000.00 in compensatory damages primarily against the developer. Although plaintiff had replaced the entire roof on her home, our client, who had originally roofed the home, received a defense verdict, and was later awarded over $160,000.00 in attorneys' fees and costs.
B. SETTLEMENTS
10520 Wilshire Associates Owners Association
Tenants of a 16-story, 108-unit residential condominium complex, located in the Westwood area of Los Angeles, sought $12,000,000.00 for defects which allegedly caused water intrusion at the roof line and window-wall system as well water intrusion from the plumbing and fire sprinkler system. The firm represented the owner/developer and facilitated a settlement of all claims with the plaintiff, that involved monetary contributions from the general contractor, several subcontractors and material suppliers. Our clients obtained a release of all claims in exchange for a waiver of costs. We were able to achieve this early result prior to expending substantial litigation costs including percipient and expert witness depositions.
Melendez
Plaintiffs in this case were the owners of eight homes in the Cottages development in Orange, California. The primary complaints made in the case involved excessive moisture penetrating the concrete slabs and moisture intrusion in the tub/shower enclosures, which led to substantial mold growth. The mold growing in these areas was determined to be stachybotrys chartarum. The mold claims were substantial enough to cause one family to vacate their home. The family's two year old daughter was diagnosed with cancer and because of the child's weakened immune system during the process of undergoing chemotherapy, plaintiffs' experts opined that the mold conditions made her condition worse. We represented the developer in the action and succeeded in structuring a resolution of the claims prior to trial with a small monetary contribution by our client. We recovered through additional insured contributions from the subcontractors all of the money our clients contributed to the settlement.
San Diego Port Authority
This was an action involving the expansion of the passenger terminals at the San Diego Airport. Our client manufactured and distributed stone installation systems, including mortar mix, that were used by the subcontractor hired to supply and install stone floors. The claim alleged that almost immediately after installation, the limestone began to crack. Claimed damages were in excess of $8,000,000.00. The demand to our client was several hundred thousand dollars. We were successful in negotiating a dismissal in exchange for a waiver of costs.
Olympic Centre
The building involved in this case, known as the Olympic Centre in Los Angeles is a six story office tower on top of five levels of above-ground parking. Our client supplied, fabricated and installed the structural steel for the building. Following the Northridge earthquake, the building suffered substantial damage, which included damage to the HVAC system, curtain wall, concrete, as well as separation between wall, ceiling and floor surfaces and other typical earthquake damage. The owners of the building hired a number of consultants and contractors to evaluate the damage and to make repairs. The consultants discovered cracks in the welds, beams and columns of the steel moment frame of the building. Because these cracks allegedly rendered the building structurally unsound and reduced the capacity of the lateral load resisting system, the building was yellow tagged and all of the tenants were evacuated. The building owners claimed in excess of $30,000,000.00 in damage. We were able to resolve the claims against our client for less than 2 percent of the amount demanded.
Hokojitsugyo Co., Ltd.
This case involved a 12-story office building located in San Diego, California. Our client contracted with the developer for the installation of a fiberglass-based, asphalt shingle, modified bitumen roofing system. Plaintiff sought money to remove and replace the existing synthetic stucco or Exterior Insulation Finish System ("EIFS") with Alucobond, which is a conventional metal panel system, because of substantial water intrusion occurring throughout the building envelope. Plaintiff's global demand was in excess of $7,600,000.00, which included several hundred thousand dollars to perform mold remediation. The demand to our client was several hundred thousand dollars. We were successful in resolving all claims against our client for $25,000.00.
University of California-Irvine
This action involved claims of construction deficiencies asserted by the University of California-Irvine involving the Arroyo Vista Housing for students, consisting of 37 buildings containing 192 units. We represented the plumber and HVAC subcontractor, as well as the window manufacturer. The cost to repair estimate for all 37 buildings exceeded $28,000,000.00, which included more than $1,000,000.00 for mold remediation. The demand for the mechanical and plumbing issues was in excess of $800,000 and the demand for window product issues was $1,400,000.00. The case ultimately settled globally for $11,000,000.00, with a $200,000.00 contribution for plumbing/HVAC issues and $35,000 for window product issues.
Bravo at Refugio
Our firm represented the roofing subcontractor in this lawsuit, which involved a 218-unit condominium project in Hercules, California. Plaintiff alleged a number of roofing deficiencies and claimed that each of the roofs required a removal and replacement. However, many of the claimed defects did not cause physical damage or personal injury because they did not allow water intrusion into the units. We were successful in resolving the matter in the first week of trial for a fraction of the amount sought, following which the case settled globally.
69 Single Family Homes
This was an action which involved five consolidated construction defect matters, arising from single family residences in the City of Los Banos in Merced County. Our firm represented the window manufacturer, which supplied windows and supplied and installed sliding glass doors. Plaintiffs' demand on the water intrusion issues allocated to our client was approximately $1 million. Through a settlement directly with plaintiffs to resolve all window product claims we were able to resolve the case for less than 3% of plaintiffs' damages and to settle around the developer. The developer was not a party to a written agreement with our client to support its express indemnity claim.
| The cases cited above are just a sample of the many cases we have handled. Our goal in each case is to obtain a cost-efficient resolution at the earliest possible date. Because of our experience in construction litigation, our judicious use of experts, our technical knowledge and familiarity of the applicable law, we are able to approach the cases with focused perspective which allows us to consistently achieve favorable results.
|
|
Written Construction Law Material
(Available
On Request - click here)
"California Construction Defect Liability Review"
"Mold Litigation - The'Perfect Storm'"
|
|
|
|
