LAKE CHARLES, La. — A Louisiana appeals court panel on Dec. 6 affirmed a trial court judge’s $1,125 award to a contractor accused of construction defects, finding that the evidence demonstrated that while the standards of the contractor’s work were comparable to a “Volkswagen” rather than a “Cadillac,” it did breach the terms of a construction contract (Calvin Paul Williams v. Vincent Alexander, Nos. CA-17-436, 17-437, La. App., 3rd Cir., 2017 La. App. Unpub. LEXIS 377).
DAYTONA BEACH, Fla. — A trial court judge in Florida erred when granting a couple’s motion to dismiss a condominium complex operator’s third-party suit against a roofing subcontractor, a Florida appeals court panel ruled Dec. 1, finding that there is a clear risk of inconsistent verdicts if the claims are tried separately (Martinique Condominiums, Inc. v. Michael P. Short, et al., No. 5D17-1546, Fla. App., 5th Dist., 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 17984).
ST. CHARLES, La. — A Louisiana appeals panel on Nov. 29 reversed an earlier ruling in which it found that an order dismissing with prejudice a man’s claims over alleged construction defects was not immediately appealable, after finding that the decision disposed of the plaintiff’s principal demand rather than particular issues (Lynton O. Hester v. Burns Builders, et al., No. CA 17-824, La. App., 3rd Cir., 2017 La. App. Unpub. LEXIS 371).
BEAUFORT, S.C. — Del Webb Communities Inc. and Pulte Homes Inc. say in an opposition brief filed Nov. 15 in South Carolina federal court that a proposed class of owners of approximately 2,000 homes built over the span of 10 years using allegedly defective stucco systems should not be certified because it is “hopelessly conflicted” (Jacqueline L. Craft, et al. v. South Carolina Plastering LLC, et al., No. 15-cv-05080-PMD, D. S.C.).
LAS VEGAS — A federal judge in Nevada on Nov. 28 denied D.R. Horton Inc.’s motion to dismiss a construction defects suit, finding that the completion of mediation satisfied the homeowners association’s presuit notification requirement (Azure Manor/Rancho de Paz Homeowners Association v. D.R. Horton, Inc., No. 14-cv-002222, D. Nev.).
PEORIA, Ill. — IKO Manufacturing Inc. says in a Nov. 16 brief filed in Illinois federal court that a proposed class for purchasers of its organic asphalt shingles who claim that the product is defective should not be certified because a number of individual issues predominate over common claims (In re: IKO Roofing Shingle Products Liability Litigation, MDL 2104, Case No. 09-md-2104, C.D. Ill.).
NEW YORK — A New York justice on Nov. 22 ordered a property owner and contractor who were renovating a property without the knowledge of an adjoining property owner to pay the woman for damages to her chimney and foundation wall and stop working on the project (Natasha Baptiste v. 70A Cooper PH LLC, et al., No. 516901/2017, N.Y. Sup., Kings Co., 2017 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 4417).
RIVERSIDE, Calif. — A trial court judge did not err when dismissing a landscaping company from a construction defects suit because it was not properly served within three years of the filing of the initial complaint, a California appeals panel ruled Nov. 27 (On Seacoast Homeowners Association v. Pacific Green Landscape, No. D069840, Calif. App., 4th Dist., 1st Div., 2017 Calif. App. Unpub. LEXIS 8048).
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — A Florida appeals panel on Nov. 22 ordered a trial court judge to recalculate the amount of damages a developer must pay as a sanction for civil contempt, holding that the initial amount included attorney fees that did not stem from the developer’s failure to send a sufficient representative to court-ordered mediation (Gozzo Development, Inc., et al. v. Anne M. Esker, No. 4D16-3734, Fla. App., 4th Dist., 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 17574).
TAVARES, Fla. — A Florida couple sued KB Home and two of its subsidiaries in state court on Nov. 16, claiming that stucco that was improperly installed on their home resulted in water infiltration and damages (Arthur Hunter, et al. v. KB Home, et al., No. 2017-CA-00219, Fla. Cir., Lake Co.).
HARRISBURG, Pa. — A legislator from Pennsylvania on Oct. 18 introduced two bills that would expand protection for homeowners and new home buyers affected by construction defects by extending the statute of limitations for claims and by requiring builders and subcontractors to inform homeowners of defects within 30 days of discovery.
SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge in California on Nov. 15 certified classes for purchasers from California, Florida, Illinois, Minnesota, Pennsylvania and West Virginia who claim that Lumber Liquidators Inc. violated state consumer protection laws when selling bamboo laminate flooring that prematurely warped, buckled, splintered, shrank and split before the expiration of the product’s warranty (Dana Gold, et al. v. Lumber Liquidators, Inc., No. 14-cv-5373, N.D. Calif.).
RIVERSIDE, Calif. — A California appeals panel on Nov. 16 reversed a trial judge’s decision to award summary judgment to a general contractor accused of construction defects, holding that the man should be allowed to present evidence to demonstrate that his allegations of defectively installed plumbing are timely (Michael Letourneau v. Turner Construction Company, No. D071680, Calif. App., 4th Dist., 1st Div., 2017 Calif. App. Unpub. LEXIS 7847).
GRETNA, La. — A Louisiana appeals panel on Oct. 25 vacated a trial court judge’s decision to award $20,000 to a couple who claimed that a builder improperly placed a lien on an apartment building it constructed, finding that the plaintiffs were unable to show that they sustained damages as a result of delayed construction and construction defects (Gerald Phillips, et al. v. Doucette & Associated Contractors, Inc., No. 17-CA-93, La. App., 5th Cir., 2017 La. App. LEXIS 2035).
LOS ANGELES — A California law representing a homeowner’s association for residents who purchased condominiums in a converted jewel manufacturing facility announced in a press release Nov. 9 that it had reached a $1 million settlement with the builder to resolve complaints stemming from construction defects that resulted in water intrusion and cracked concrete.
PHILADELPHIA — A 2-1 panel of the Pennsylvania Superior Court on Nov. 3 affirmed a ruling that a project manager was not entitled to $62,510.73 in damages from a concrete subcontractor after finding that a condominium owner’s association could not pursue a breach of the implied warranty of habitability claim against the project manager (Beaumont Condominium Association v. Jeffrey M. Brown Associates, Inc., et al., Nos. 2177 EDA 2016, 2181 EDA 2016, Pa. Super., 2017 Pa. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 4082).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — Lumber Liquidators Inc. announced Oct. 24 that it entered into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to settle litigation related to Chinese-manufactured laminate flooring that allegedly emits excessive levels of formaldehyde (In re: Lumber Liquidators Chinese-Manufactured Flooring Products Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation, MDL 2627, Case No. 15-md-2627).
NEW YORK — A construction consulting services company was dismissed from a third-party action brought against it and other contractors by a condominium buildings’ sponsor by a trial court justice in New York on Oct. 26 after he found that the agreement between the sponsor and the company did not include an indemnity provision (Board of Managers of the 20 Henry Street Condominium v. CJUF III 20 Henry Property, LLC, et al., No. 500289/15, N.Y. Sup., Kings Co., 2017 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 4057).
CHICAGO — Two men who initiated a class action lawsuit against a home improvement store claiming that the company falsely advertised the size of dimensional lumber on Oct. 30 filed a notice of appeal in Illinois federal court stating that they intend to appeal a Sept. 29 ruling dismissing their suit (Michael Fuchs, et al. v. Menard, Inc., No. 17-01752, N.D. Ill.).
LAS VEGAS — A panel of the Nevada Supreme Court on Oct. 20 held that subsequent purchasers of condominium units can be represented in a construction defects lawsuit filed by a homeowners association, citing an earlier ruling in which the court found that Nevada law supports the assertion that associations represent all unit owners within a community (Grand Canyon Village Homeowners Association v. Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada, In and For the County of Clark, et al., No. 66603, Nev. Sup., 2017 Nev. Unpub. LEXIS 923).