BATON ROUGE, La. — A Louisiana appeals panel on Feb. 17 affirmed rulings awarding summary judgment to a home builder and its insurer, finding that a family’s allegations that defective workmanship caused a fire that destroyed the home were perempted by the New Home Warranty Act (NHWA) (James E. Shields Jr., et al. v. Alvin R. Savoie & Associates Inc., d/b/a Savoie Construction, et al., No. 2016 CA 0825 consolidated with No. 2016 CA 0826, La. App., 1st Cir., 2017 La. App. LEXIS 249).
AUGUSTA, Ga. — A federal judge in Georgia on Feb. 22 dismissed without prejudice a proposed class action suit accusing Daikin Industries Ltd. (DIL), Daikin Applied Americas Inc. (DAA) and Daikin North Americas LLC (DNA) of making and selling air conditioning units with faulty evaporator coils, ruling that a building owner lacks personal jurisdiction to assert claims against DIL and failed to state claims against DAA and DNA (Paws Holdings, LLC v. Daikin Industries, Ltd., et al., No. 16-58, S.D. Ga., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24684).
NEW HAVEN, Conn. — A federal judge in Connecticut on Feb. 17 held that a couple could pursue claims that allegedly improper installation of spray polyurethane foam (SPF) insulation in their home resulted in property damage requiring remediation but that they failed to provide causation evidence to show that they suffered respiratory problems after being exposed to volatile organic compound (VOC) vapors from the products (Richard Beyer, et al. v. Anchor Insulation Co. Inc., et al., No. 13 CV 1576, D. Conn., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23434).
PHILADELPHIA — A Pennsylvania appeals panel on Feb. 17 ordered a new trial on liability and damages in a construction defects case after learning that the judge who presided over the suit had retired and that no other judge could prepare a supplemental opinion explaining his rulings (Leo J. Dolan v. Hurd Millwork Company Inc., et al., No. 2951 EDA 2015 Pa. Super., 2017 Pa. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 691).
CHARLESTON, S.C. — Pella Corp. says in an opposition brief filed Feb. 16 that a federal judge in South Carolina should not reconsider his Dec. 12 ruling that plaintiffs’ experts’ opinions about defects in the company’s Architect and Designer Series windows are unreliable because the plaintiffs’ arguments have already been raised and were rejected (In re: Pella Corporation Architect and Designer Series Windows Marketing, Sales Practices and products Liability Litigation, MDL 2514, Case No. 14mn1, D. S.C.).
RALEIGH, N.C. — A federal judge in North Carolina on Feb. 7 overruled a general contractor’s argument that a bankruptcy court judge erred in finding that its negligence claim against a subcontractor who improperly installed shelf angles was barred by the economic loss doctrine, holding that the contractor was unable to show what damage resulted from the improper installation (Weaver Cooke Construction, LLC v. Randolph Stair and Rail Company, No. 14-CV-709-BR, E.D. N.C., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19442).
SAN FRANCISCO — A law firm representing the owners of 46 condominiums and two commercial units at a refurbished building in San Francisco announced Feb. 7 that a $1.5 million settlement has been reached to resolve construction defect allegations against the general contractor and developer (201 Sansome Street Owners Association v. 201 Sansome Street, LP, et al., No. CGC-15-548022, Calif. Super., San Francisco Co.).
SAN DIEGO — A California appeals panel on Feb. 10 vacated a trial court judge’s ruling staying a lawsuit brought under the Right to Repair Act (RRA) for defects in the construction of 28 homes, finding that the builder’s failure to timely respond to the notice of the defects warranted reversal (William Blanchette, et al. v. Superior Court of Imperial County, et al., No. D070545, Calif. App., 4th Dist., Div. 1, 2017 Cal. App. LEXIS 105).
NEW HAVEN, Conn. — A couple who claims that they suffered physical injuries and property damage as a result of spray polyurethane foam (SPF) insulation in their home say in a brief filed Feb. 1 in Connecticut federal court that a supplemental report submitted by one of their experts should not be stricken from the record because it contains new information about the remediation plan for their home that was added to the report to clarify any ambiguities (Richard Beyer, et al. v. Anchor Insulation Co. Inc., et al., No. 13 CV 1576, D. Conn.).
HELENA, Mont. — A Montana Supreme Court panel on Feb. 7 affirmed a ruling awarding summary judgment to a builder and an architect accused of defectively constructing a high school roof that partially collapsed following a snow storm in 2010, finding that the school district’s lawsuit was barred by the 10-year statute of repose because the roof was being used for its intended purpose beginning in 1998 (Hill County High School District No. A. v. Dick Anderson Construction, Inc., et al., No. 16-0186, Mont. Sup., 2017 Mont. LEXIS 38).
NEW HAVEN, Conn. — A Connecticut couple on Feb. 2 asked a federal judge to deny a motion to continue an upcoming trial against the company they hired to install spray polyurethane foam (SPF) in their home, explaining that the female plaintiff is scheduled for a March 16 surgery that will keep her from walking for six months (Richard Beyer, et al. v. Anchor Insulation Co. Inc., et al., No. 13 CV 1576, D. Conn.).
SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal judge on Dec. 22 granted final approval of a settlement by BP Solar International Inc. and Home Depot U.S.A. Inc. that is valued at more than $67 million, to end a class suit accusing the companies of marketing and selling defective solar panels (Michael Allagas, et al. v. BP Solar International, Inc., et al., No. 14-560, N.D. Calif.).
CHARLESTON, S.C. — Plaintiffs claiming that Pella Corp.’s Architect and Design Series windows are defective and allow for water intrusion that causes property damage on Jan. 17 asked a federal judge in South Carolina to alter or amend his Dec. 12 decision to exclude the testimony of their expert Michael Louis, arguing that the judge erroneously adopted the manufacturer’s interpretation of various engineering standards and guidelines (In re: Pella Corporation Architect and Designer Series Windows Marketing, Sales Practices and products Liability Litigation, MDL 2514, Case No. 14mn1, D. S.C.).
NEW HAVEN, Conn. — A company that installed spray polyurethane foam (SPF) insulation that allegedly caused a couple to suffer respiratory injuries on Jan. 11 filed a motion in Connecticut federal court seeking to strike a new report submitted by their expert on Dec. 12, arguing that the report contains new opinions that are not based on newly discovered evidence (Richard Beyer, et al. v. Anchor Insulation Co. Inc., et al., No. 13 CV 1576, D. Conn.).
NEW HAVEN, Conn. — A defendant company that installed and removed allegedly defective spray foam polyurethane (SPF) insulation on Jan. 27 filed a motion in Connecticut federal court to continue a trial until April, explaining that its owner has two scheduled vacations in March and that its counsel has another trial scheduled to begin March 1 (Richard Beyer, et al. v. Anchor Insulation Co. Inc., et al., No. 13 CV 1576, D. Conn.).
STAMFORD, Conn. — A trial court judge in Connecticut on Jan. 24 ruled that a couple who prevailed on their claims that the company from which they purchased their home breached the terms of the sales agreement after they discovered that hardwood floors had been improperly installed were entitled to attorney fees and expert fees in the amount of $68,495.44 (Joseph Arcadi, et al. v. Toth Investments LLC, et al., No. FSTCV146022841S, Conn. Super., Stamford-Norwalk Dist.).
PHILADELPHIA — A Pennsylvania appeals panel on Jan. 13 ordered a trial judge to issue a supplemental opinion explaining why he concluded that a homeowner couple was entitled to $748,287.67, after finding that the judge’s three-page opinion did not address the issues raised on appeal (Leo J. Dolan v. Hurd Millwork Company Inc., et al., No. 2951 EDA 2015 Pa. Super.; 2017 Pa Super. Unpub. LEXIS 151).
LOS ANGELES — A federal judge in California in Jan. 23 dismissed with prejudice a proposed class action lawsuit seeking damages under the Right of Repair Act (RORA) and the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) over allegedly defective air conditioning units manufactured by Daikin Industries Ltd., finding that the plaintiffs’ claims failed because they did not involve the installation of the units (Joanna Park-Kim, et al. v. Daikin Industries, Ltd., et al., No. 15-cv-9523-CAS, C.D. Calif.; 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10454).
CARSON CITY, Nev. — A panel of Nevada’s Supreme Court on Dec. 29 reversed a trial court’s finding that construction defects claims brought against Del Webb Communities Inc. were untimely, ruling that the date of completion occurs when the notice of completion is filed rather than signed and notarized (Robert M. Dykema, et al. v. Del Webb Communities Inc., No. 69335, Nev. Sup.; 2016 Nev. LEXIS 726).
SAN DIEGO — A California appeals panel on Jan. 13 upheld a trial court judge’s ruling for discretionary dismissal of a construction defects lawsuit, holding that a stay entered in the case in September 2011 applied only to plaintiffs who had not complied with the presuit notifications of the Right to Repair Act (Jeremy Arthur, et al. v. Centex Homes, No. D069421, Calif. App., 4th Dist., Div. 1.; 2017 Calif. App. Unpub. LEXIS 268).