CLASS CERTIFICATION properly granted in soil settlement suit against subdivision developers… Souza affirmed. [Read more…]
$2,221,839 verdict, apartment building earthwork
VERDICT: $2,221,839, breach of subcontract by earthwork subcontractor resulting in demolition of apartment building due to movement from lack of soil compaction and foundation drainage. [Read more…]
Class certification, subdivision “bad dirt”
CLASS CERTIFICATION granted in subdivision “bad dirt” suit against developers… $3,440,000 settlement with engineers… Souza, Todd. [Read more…]
Construction defects, suit remains alive per clarification
CONSTRUCTION DEFECTS: Suit involving apartment building that was destroyed due to soil movement remains alive pursuant to Court’s ruling on Plaintiffs’ requested “clarification” of summary judgment rulings which Defendant construed as resulting in dismissal of entire case… Hayworth. [Read more…]
Construction defects, apartment building soil movement
CONSTRUCTION DEFECTS: Tort claims against excavation contractor of apartment building that was destroyed due to soil movement including concealment of defects dismissed on summary judgment based on statutes of limitation… contract claims survive summary judgment BUT Plaintiffs are unable to seek restoration damages because they cannot prove “temporary injury” resulting in dismissal of entire case… Hayworth. [Read more…]
Dismissal of dewatering claims following verdict
DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE of dewatering system claims following $1,733,887.40 verdict and settlement with Defendant’s insurer renders appeal moot over request that dismissal be at least conditioned on indemnity from recoupment of settlement amount and for fees/ costs as prevailing party… Todd affirmed (IOR I-3(c)). [Read more…]
$1,733,887.40 verdict, basement dewatering
VERDICT: $233,887.40 compensatory, $1.5 million punitives, negligent design or installation of dewatering system in home with basement below water table… principal liable for judgment for fraudulent transfer of assets. [Read more…]
Insurance, jockeys, participants v. exhibitors
INSURANCE: Jockeys are “participants,” not “exhibitors,” excluded from liability policy… exclusions not violative of law, ambiguous, reasonable expectations… no negligent procurement by agent… Todd. [Read more…]