n late September 2022, Arizona’s Supreme Court issued a new opinion important for any person or company working in residential construction. The Court’s opinion in Zambrano v. M & RC II LLC, et al affirms the importance of...more
In New Jersey, the “economic-loss doctrine” bars tort claims when the plaintiff’s only damages are economic in nature because, when parties enter into a contractual relationship, a contractual remedy flows from contract, not...more
For many of us of a certain age, our first exposure to the Latin phrase caveat emptor came from an episode of the classic sitcom, The Brady Bunch. “Let the buyer beware” was the lesson Mr. Brady imparted to Greg for his...more
In Earl v. NVR, Inc., No. 20-2109, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 6451, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (Third Circuit) considered whether, under Pennsylvania law, the plaintiff’s Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer...more
In William Lansing v. Doe, 2019 Ore. App. LEXIS 1564, the Court of Appeals of Oregon considered whether the Economic Loss Doctrine (ELD) applied to the plaintiff’s claims based on purportedly faulty construction work in a...more
Often times, both contract and tort claims co-exist in a subrogation matter and the line between the two can be blurred. This is especially true in the context of damages resulting from new home construction defect claims....more
A recent Utah Appellate Court upheld the dismissal of a homeowners' claims against a geotechnical engineer because the homeowners did not have a contract with the geotechnical engineer and therefore their claims were barred...more
In its broadest sense, the "economic loss rule" prohibits recovery in tort for purely economic loss incurred under contract law. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary online defines tort as "a wrongful act other than breach of...more
In Hexagon Holdings Inc. v. Carlisle Syntec, Inc. No. 2017-175-Appeal, 2019 R.I. Lexis 14 (January 17, 2019), the Supreme Court of Rhode Island, discussing claims associated with allegedly defective construction, addressed...more
In Kmart Corp. v. Herzog Roofing, Inc., 2018 Wisc. App. Lexis 842, the Court of Appeals of Wisconsin considered whether the economic loss doctrine barred the plaintiff’s negligence claims against the defendant roofer for...more
Although it may seem strange at first, the recent ruling by the California Fourth Appellate District Court in Thee Sombrero, Inc. v. Scottsdale Co., (2018 EL 5292072), holding that an insurer must pay for a claim where there...more
The California Supreme Court ruled in McMillin Albany LLC et al. v. The Superior Court of Kern County, (1/18/2018) 4 cal. 5th 241, that California’s Right to Repair Act, California Civil Code sections 895 et seq. (“Act”) is...more
McMillin Albany LLC v. Superior Court, No. S229762, 2018 Cal. LEXIS 211 (Jan. 18, 2018) - Several homeowners (“Plaintiffs”) brought suit against developer/general contractor McMillin Albany LLC (“McMillin”) for alleged...more
Relatively few people in the commercial construction industry are kept up at night by polyisobutylene (PIB) — the synthetic rubber sealant commonly used to provide a long term and durable moisture barrier for insulated glass...more
Arizona homebuilders will welcome with open arms two recent legal rulings of substantial impact to their industry. In the first decision, on July 28, 2015, in Sullivan v. Pulte Home Corp., No. 1 CA-CV 14-0199, the Arizona...more
Recently, the Arizona Court of Appeals answered another lingering question of paramount importance to the construction industry – whether homebuilders and other construction industry professionals may be indefinitely subject...more
The Massachusetts Supreme Court recently held in Wyman v. Ayer Properties, LLC, that the “economic loss rule is not applicable to the damage caused to the common areas of a condominium building as a result of the builder’s...more
Wyman v. Ayer Properties, LLC, 469 Mass. 64, 2014 Mass. LEXIS 524 (July 10, 2014) - The Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that the economic loss rule, which bars recovery of tort damages from the negligent supplier of...more
In Utah, a plaintiff must generally in be in privity with the “original contractor, architect, engineer or real estate developer” to bring an “action for defective design or construction.” Utah Code Ann. §78 B-4-513(4). This...more
Last week, in Sullivan v. Pulte Home Corp., No. CV-12-0419-PR, Arizona’s highest court took on a lingering question about the scope of economic loss doctrine since its landmark decision of Flagstaff Affordable Hous. Ltd....more
This annual update is to provide a review of the most significant decisions impacting design professionals. The cases will consider the following important issues: the effect contractual language has on a professional...more
Lack of “imminent risk” does not bar recovery for economic loss arising from a dangerously defective structure, the Alberta Court of Appeal recently held. Typically, courts are reluctant to award lost profits or other...more
In This Issue: Letter from the Editor; Colorado Construction Law Developments in 2012; Arizona Court of Appeals Issues Decision Related to the Application of the Statute of Repose and Economic Loss Doctrine for...more
On December 4, 2012, the Arizona Court of Appeals issued a decision in Sullivan v. Pulte Home Corporation that will have significant implications in the construction industry. The case revolved around a home built by Pulte in...more