MIAMI — A Florida man on Oct. 8 sued Daikin Applied Americas Inc. in state court, claiming that defects in the air conditioning unit manufacturer’s product cause premature corrosion in the copper tubing, resulting in refrigerant leaks, and that the company failed to disclose the flaw to consumers despite its knowledge of the defect (Alain J. Viergutz v. Daikin Applied Americas Inc., No. 2018-CA-34044, Fla. 11th Jud. Cir., Miami-Dade Co.).
WILMINGTON, Del. — The trustees of a living trust on Oct. 12 sued the builder of their home in Delaware state court, claiming that the stucco facade on their home allows for water infiltration (Parikh Living Trust v. Louis Capano & Associates Inc., No. N18C-10-157, Del. Super.).
TAMPA, Fla. — A homebuilder’s installation of stucco on a Florida home was defective because it allowed for water intrusion that caused damage to the interior walls and because it did not conform with the Florida Building Codes Act, a couple says in a lawsuit filed Oct. 9 in state court (Wenford Coleman, et al. v. Centex Homes, No. 2018-CA-009880, Fla. Cir., Hillsborough Co.).
BARTOW, Fla. — A Florida couple sued KB Home Orlando LLC in state court on Oct. 10, claiming that the improper installation of the stucco on their home violated the Florida Building Codes Act (Martin Guthrie, et al. v. KB Home Orlando LLC, No. 2018-CA-004066, Fla. Cir., Polk Co.).
URBANA, Ill. — Plaintiffs claiming that organic asphalt shingles manufactured by IKO Manufacturing Inc. that prematurely deteriorate before the expiration of their 30-year warranty on Oct. 4 moved for approval of a settlement worth approximately $30 million that would resolve the litigation (In re: IKO Roofing Shingle Products Liability Litigation, MDL 2104, Case No. 09-md-2104, C.D. Ill.).
NEW ORLEANS — A federal judge in Louisiana on Oct. 3 denied a couple’s motion to remand their lawsuit seeking damages for Chinese-made drywall that was installed in their home following Hurricane Katrina, finding that they improperly joined their insurer as a defendant (Cedric Richmond, et al. v. National Gypsum Services Co., No. 17-7453, E.D. La., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 170814).
SANTA ANA, Calif. — A California appeals panel on Sept. 7 upheld a ruling awarding summary judgment to the builder and developer of a residential community consisting of 184 high-end homes that allegedly have construction defects, holding that the developer’s control of the homeowners association’s board of directors did not toll the Right to Repair Act’s (RRA) 10-year statute of limitations (Waterfront Community Association v. PLC Waterfront LLC, et al., No. G054235, Calif. App., 4th Dist., 3rd Div., 2018 Calif. App. Unpub. LEXIS 6134).
ORLANDO, Fla. — The owner of a restaurant says in a Sept. 20 lawsuit filed in Florida state court against a company that constructed a building it purchased that it will incur more than $75,000 in damages to repair defects it discovered while renovating the building (Resilient Restaurants LLC v. Mulligan Constructors Inc., No. 2018-CA-010309, Fla. Cir., Orange Co.).
SEATTLE — Plaintiffs seeking certification of a statewide class in Washington for residents whose homes have shingles made by Certainteed Corp. that suffer from premature granule loss say in an Oct. 1 reply brief filed in federal court that two rulings from the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals show that consumer protection claims involving a defective product are well-suited for class treatment (Paula Wetzel, et al. v. Certainteed Corp., No. 16cv01160, W.D. Wash.).
LAS VEGAS — A federal judge in Nevada on Oct. 1 denied a homeowners association’s emergency motion to amend its complaint to add a claim for declaratory judgment, holding that the request was procedurally defective and that the request to add the claim was not an emergency because discovery is not scheduled to end until December 2019 (Azure Manor/Rancho De Paz Homeowners Association v. D.R. Horton Inc., No. 14-cv-02222-JCM-NJK, D. Nev.).
CHICAGO — An Illinois appeals court panel on Sept. 28 upheld rulings awarding summary judgment to a developer and municipality, finding that a couple who complained that the defendants breached the terms of an annexation agreement lacked standing to bring their claims because they were not subsequent purchasers of the land and were not intended beneficiaries to the agreement (Patricia Doyle, et al. v. Tinley Park, et al., No. 1-17-0357, Ill. App., 1st Dist., 2nd Div., 2018 Ill. App. LEXIS 716).
ST. PAUL, Minn. — A Minnesota appeals panel on Sept. 24 affirmed a ruling holding that a developer must indemnify a homebuilder in a suit brought by a homeowners association over crumbling pavers used as a road’s surface, finding that the developer agreed to do so pursuant to a declaration between the parties (Bluffs on Sans Pierre Townhomes and Villas Association v. Wooddale Builders Inc., et al., No. A18-0404, Minn. App., 2018 Minn. App. Unpub. LEXIS 839).
SAN ANTONIO — A federal judge in Texas on Aug. 28 granted a joint motion filed by a Pulte Homes of Texas L.P. and NIBCO Inc. to dismiss with prejudice a suit brought by the home builder over ruptures in PEX piping (Pulte Homes of Texas, L.P. v. NIBCO, Inc., No. 17-CV-544, W.D. Texas).
CHICAGO — A homebuilder says in a reply brief filed Sept. 13 that a couple cannot pursue a claim for violation of the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act (ICFA) because they raise arguments that are not based on “artful retelling” of their amended complaint and because the cases they rely on contain “clear-cut factual allegations of oppression, intimidation and deceit” (Paul Smith, et al. v. NVR Inc., No. 17 C 8328, N.D. Ill.).
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — The filing of presuit notifications to a homebuilder pursuant to Florida Statutes Chapter 558 constituted an action that showed that the plaintiffs raised their construction defect claims before the expiration of the 10-year statute of repose, a Florida appeals court panel ruled Sept. 12 in overturning a decision dismissing the plaintiffs’ claims (Robert Gindel, et al. v. Centex Homes, et al., No. 4D17-2149, Fla. App., 4th Dist., LEXIS 13019).
GALVESTON, Texas — A couple on Aug. 21 sued the builder of a home they purchased in August 2016 in Texas state court, claiming that it failed to disclose that construction defects and the improper installation of the home’s heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) unit allowed for water intrusion that caused mold growth (Rick Faulkner, et al. v. D.R. Horton-Emerald Ltd., No. 18-CV-1143, Texas Dist., Galveston Co.).
FRANKFORT, Ky. — A construction contract between a couple and a homebuilder unambiguously stated that any liability for construction defects was subject to a 12-month limited warranty, a Kentucky appeals panel ruled Sept. 7 in affirming the builder’s summary judgment award (Andy Pippin, et al. v. Owensboro Master Builder Inc., No. 2017-CA-000136-MR, Ky. App., 2018 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 654).
BATON ROUGE, La. — A couple’s expert’s testimony that windows made by Jeld Wen Inc. are defective is reliable, a federal judge in Louisiana ruled Sept. 10, finding that a test that is intended to provide a comprehensive methodology for evaluating water leakage through walls could be used to support his opinion (Ronald Leo, et al. v. Jeld Wen Inc., No. 16-00605-BAJ-EWD, M.D. La., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 154002).
LAKE CHARLES, La. — A federal judge in Louisiana on Sept. 7 adopted a magistrate judge’s Aug. 16 recommendation to grant a roofing subcontractor’s motion for summary judgment on the ground that a couple’s suit claiming that a replacement roof was improperly installed on their home was filed beyond the one-year statute of limitations (Elmo Green, et al. v. Lowe’s Home Center LLC, et al., No. 16cv698, W.D. La., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153240).
LOS ANGELES — A California company on Aug. 8 filed a lawsuit in state court against the developer, builder and subcontractors who performed work on a $22 million, 10,000-square-foot home, complaining that the defendants concealed defects in the installation of the home’s driveway, retaining wall and rain tank system and failed to repair 143 known construction defects (Victrola 89 LLC v. Jaman Properties 8 LLC, et al., No. BC 717254, Calif. Super., Los Angeles Co.).