NEWS

SORT BY PRACTICE AREAS:
ALL
  • ALL
  • Architects and Engineers/Design Professionals
  • Construction
  • Coverage
  • Environmental
  • Fair Housing and Public Accommodation
  • General Liability
  • Insurance Fraud/Special Investigations
  • Employment
  • Medical & Healthcare
  • Professional Liability
  • Securities
  • Workers' Compensation
There are no articles currently for that practice area!
architects and engineers
ALABAMA PASSES DAM SAFETY LEGISLATION

Until recently, Alabama was the only state that had yet to enact legislation ensuring that dams and reservoirs were safely constructed and maintained to protect downstream water users and upstream property owners. With the introduction of Alabama’s new Dam Safety legislation, the Alabama legislature has given professional civil engineers across the state a new role in the construction, reconstruction, and renovation of dams and reservoirs, while also opening the flood gates for potential civil liability against them.


architects and engineers
FLORIDA AMENDS CONDOMINIUM INSPECTION STATUTE

On June 9, 2023, Florida Governor Ron Desantis signed legislation amending the inspection requirements for condominium buildings that reach thirty years of age and for condominiums the control of which is turned over from the ownership association to the owners themselves.  See 2023 Fla. Sess. Law Serv. 203.  Some of the changes directly impact inspection requirements related to architectural and engineering soundness.

architects and engineers
BUILDING MATERIAL WARRANTIES NOT HELD AT GUNPOINT IN ALABAMA

The construction of a structure encompasses many different areas that often are not realized until a party is subject to litigation arising from the construction. Litigation can often bring to light certain warranties that attach to building materials or products that make up a newly constructed structure. Common warranties potentially impacting parties to litigation arising out of construction are material and workmanship warranties. An often-forgotten warranty claim that can impact building material providers arises out of the design of a particular material or product.

architects and engineers
FLORIDA PASSES NEW CONSTRUCTION DEFECT STATUTE

On April 13, 2023, Governor Ron DeSantis signed into law SB 360 (Chapter 2023-22, Laws of Florida). The new Florida law affects claims against design professionals in many ways.

First, Fla. Stat. §95.11(3)(c) establishes a new statute of repose for design defect claims. SB 360 leaves intact the four-year statute of limitations, but shortens the statute of repose from 10 to 7 years for latent defects. 

architects and engineers
BUILDING A CASE FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT: WHEN COPYING SOMEONE'S WORK GOES FROM FLATTERY TO LIABILITY IN THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

Kipp Flores Architects (KFA) brought a copyright infringement lawsuit against Pradera SFR (Pradera), American Housing Ventures (AHV), and KTGY in the US District Court of the Western District of Texas. KFA alleged the unlawful distribution of its copyrighted architectural design, contending that AHV either copied KFA's works or induced Pradera and KTGY to do so.

architects and engineers
FINRA ISSUES NEW GUIDANCE ON ACATS FRAUD

On March 28, 2023, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) published Regulatory Notice 23-06 addressing the “recent trend[s] in the fraudulent transfer of customer accounts through the Automated Customer Account Transfer Service (ACATS).” ACATS is an automated transfer system developed by the National Securities Clearing Corporation (NSCC). It allows eligible participants to automatically initiate, review, and complete the transfer of customer accounts through standardized procedures. FINRA Rule 11870 (Customer Account Transfer Contracts) governs the account transfer process, establishing rules that firms must follow when a customer completes a Transfer Instruction Form (TIF).

architects and engineers
TEXAS REQUIRES A CERTIFICATE OF MERIT FOR NEGLIGENT HOME INSPECTION CASE

Texas requires a plaintiff suing an engineer to obtain a “certificate of merit” from a third-party professional that the Complaint has merit, and failure to do so is grounds for dismissal.  In Tucker Engineering, Inc. v. Temperley, the Texas Court of Appeals held that an engineer hired to inspect a home was practicing engineering and a certificate of merit was therefore required before filing suit.  No. 03-21-00565-CV, 2022 WL 17684036 (Tex. Ct. App. Dec. 15, 2022) (unpublished).

architects and engineers
NEVADA, FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT UPHOLDS ECONOMIC LOSS DOCTRINE FOR DESIGN PROFESSIONALS IN RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION DISPUTES
In Pulver v. Kane, 2022 WL 17327182 (D. Nev. Nov. 29, 2022), a Federal District Court in Nevada upheld the economic loss doctrine to preclude a contractor from asserting tort claims against design professionals in suits seeking to recover solely economic losses arising from residential construction. Pulver Construction Company (“Pulver”) contracted with the homeowners to construct a residential home and ultimately sued the homeowners for unpaid fees.
architects and engineers
TENNESSEE’S STATUTE OF REPOSE APPLIES TO CLAIMS FOR CONTRACTUAL INDEMNITY

The statute of repose is a powerful defense for a design or construction professional, since most provide an absolute bar to claims filed outside the repose period.  Tennessee’s statute of repose was recently found to apply to contractual indemnity claims, when the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee granted summary judgment to a third-party defendant sued by a landscape architect for claims of contractual indemnity.  Hinman v. BrightView Landscape Dev., Inc., No. 3:19-cv-00551, 2022 WL 4231019, at *1 (M.D. Tenn., Sept. 13, 2022), appeal docketed, No. 22-6019 (6th Cir. Nov. 21, 2022).

architects and engineers
VENEZUELAN ARCHITECT’S USE OF THE WORD “ARCHITECT” IN COMMERCIAL WEBPAGE AMOUNTS TO UNLICENSED PRACTICE OF ARCHITECTURE IN FLORIDA

In Enrique Feldman and Feldman Architecture v. Florida Department of Professional Regulation, So. 3d WL 17576861, (Fla. 1d DCA 2022), the First District Court of Appeal of Florida ruled against an architect for his online marketing of design services in Florida.  Enrique Feldman is an architect with thirty-five years of experience in Venezuela, but was not licensed to practice architecture in Florida where he marketed himself as an architect.  Feldman used the word “architect” in his commercial webpages and laid out the services he offered.  As a result, Feldman was disciplined by Florida’s architectural board, the Florida Department of Professional Architecture (“Department”).  Feldman appealed the adverse ruling that the use of the word “architect” amounted to unlicensed practice of architecture in Florida.

architects and engineers
TEXAS APPELLATE COURT HOLDS DISMISSAL IS PROPER WHEN A PLAINTIFF FAILS TO ATTACH A CERTIFICATE OF MERIT TO A COMPLAINT WHEN ALLEGING CLAIMS AGAINST ENGINEERS

In LJA Eng'g Inc. v. Santos, 652 S.W.3d 916, 918 (Tex. App. 2022), the Court of Appeals of Texas upheld the dismissal of plaintiff’s claims when plaintiff failed to file a certificate of merit with the complaint. LJA Engineering, Inc. (“LJA”) contracted with the City of Sour Lake to provide engineering services for a sanitary sewer rehabilitation project. Manuel Molina (“Molina”) was employed by Kellen Environmental, a company working on the project. A worker fell into a sewer pipe that had an open manhole cover and Molina jumped into the pipe to help. Molina was exposed to lethal poisonous gas in the pipe. Molina’s surviving spouse sued LJA alleging its negligence caused Molina’s death.

architects and engineers
NORTH CAROLINA AFFIRMS RULE THAT IN A LAWSUIT WITH MULTIPLE CONTRACTORS, THE STATUTE OF REPOSE RUNS WHEN EACH CONTRACTOR’S WORK IS COMPLETED, NOT WHEN THE ENTIRE PROJECT IS COMPLETED

In Gaston County Board of Education v. Shelco, LLC, 2022 WL 3363819 (N.C. App. Aug. 16, 2022), a North Carolina appellate court held that when a construction project involves multiple contractors, the statute of repose begins to run as to each contractor when its work is completed, rather than when the entire project is completed, but still refused to dismiss the claim because the date of completion was not clear from pleadings. 

architects and engineers
FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT IN FLORIDA HOLDS SUCCESSOR ARCHITECT STATUTE DOES NOT RELEASE ORIGINAL ARCHITECT FROM LIABILITY

In Hotels of Deerfield, LLC v. Studio 78, LLC, the Court held the Florida Administrative Code Section which confers “all professional and legal responsibility” to successor architects who reuse already sealed contract documents does not also release original architects from liability.

architects and engineers
APPLICATION OF NORTH CAROLINA’S ECONOMIC LOSS DOCTRINE IS HOTLY DEBATED SUBJECT

North Carolina’s version of the economic loss doctrine prohibits recovery for purely economic losses in tort, “for [a defendant’s] simple failure to perform his contract.”  In other words, where a party can sue for economic losses in a breach of contract claim, he is barred from also suing in tort for those same losses. 

architects and engineers
ENGINEERS HAVE NO DUTY TO OWNERS WITH WHOM THEY ARE NOT IN CONTRACTUAL PRIVITY FOR ECONOMIC LOSS IN ARIZONA

In Cal-Am Properties Inc. v. Edais Eng'g Inc., 509 P.3d 386, 388 (Ariz. 2022), the Arizona Supreme Court held design professionals are not liable for economic damages incurred by a Plaintiff with whom they are not in privity of contract. Cal-Am Properties, Inc. (“Cal-Am”) was a developer and operator of RV and mobile-home parks. Cal-Am leased the Sundance RV Resort, with the intention of constructing a new banquet and concert hall on the property.

architects and engineers
TEXAS APPELLATE COURT HOLDS AN ARCHITECT’S THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT FOR NEGLIGENT DESIGN REQUIRES A CERTIFICATE OF MERIT

In Thompson Hancock Witte & Associates, Inc. v. Stanley Spurling & Hamilton, Inc., 2022 WL 1010270 (Tex. App. April 5, 2022), a Texas appellate court determined a third-party plaintiff architect could not rely on the original plaintiff’s Certificate of Merit if it was not incorporated by reference into its third-party complaint.


architects and engineers
NORTH CAROLINA LEGISLATURE CLARIFIES DESIGN BUILD CONTRACTING PROCESS FOR PUBLIC PROJECTS

North Carolina’s Governor Roy Cooper signed Session Law 2022-1 early 2022, which amended and revised North Carolina statutes applicable to public construction projects within the state. Beginning March 1, 2022, the amendments and revisions went into effect, which serve to clarify and update the statutory provisions relevant to the design-build public contracting process.

architects and engineers
MISSOURI FEDERAL COURT HOLDS THE ECONOMIC LOSS DOCTRINE DOES NOT BAR CONTRIBUTION

In ACE American Insurance Co. v. AERCO International, Inc., 2022 WL 814788 (E.D. Mo., March 17, 2022), the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri   held the absence of privity of contract and the economic loss doctrine do not bar a contractor’s contribution claim against an architect and its subconsultant.

architects and engineers
STATE LAW CLAIMS AGAINST ARCHITECT ARE NOT PREEMPTED BY THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT

In Bd. of Regents of Nevada Sys. of Higher Educ. on Behalf of Univ. of Nevada, Reno v. Worth Grp. Architects, P.C., 499 P.3d 1177 (Nev. 2021), the Nevada Supreme Court held a Plaintiff’s non-indemnity claims against an architect were not preempted by the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”).

architects and engineers
PENNSYLVANIA COURT HOLDS THAT ANTI ASSIGNMENT PROVISION PRECLUDED ASSIGNMENT BEFORE CONTRACT HAD BEEN PERFORMED ONLY

In Gito, Inc. v. Axis Architecture, P.C., 2021 WL 5858467 (Pa. App. Dec. 10, 2021), a Pennsylvania Appellate Court held an anti-assignment provision in a contract between the Owner and Architect precluded the Owner from assigning the contract to a third party before the contract had been performed, but did not preclude a post-performance assignment to recover damages for breach of the contract.

architects and engineers
FLORIDA PROPOSES NEW CONSTRUCTION DEFECT STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS AND REPOSE

On November 2, 2021, the Florida Legislature began proposing amendments to Florida’s construction defect statute of limitations and repose under 2022 Florida Senate Bill No. 736 (“SB 736”). “The purpose of a statute of repose is to cut off the right of action after a specified time measured from the delivery of a product or the completion of work, regardless of the time of the accrual of the cause of action or the notice of the invasion of a legal right.” According to the Florida Legislature, “the [new] bill provides for a [four]-year limitations period for bringing a construction defect action, whether the action is based on a patent or obvious defect or a latent or hidden defect. The statutory language authorizing a [ten]-year statute of repose for latent defects is repealed.”

architects and engineers
COLORADO APPELLATE COURT RULES LIMITAITON OF LIABILITY PROVISION IN ENGINEER’S CONTRACT WAS AMBIGUOUS, BUT NOT VOID

In Johnson Nathan Strohe, P.C. v. MEP Engineering, Inc., 2021 WL 4314216 (Colo. App. Sept. 23, 2021), a Colorado appellate court addressed an issue of first impression and held that a limitation of liability provision in the contract between an architect and engineer was ambiguous, but did not render the provision void.

architects and engineers
ALABAMA ENACTS NEW DESIGN PROFESSIONAL STATUTE THAT PROHIBITS CERTAIN CONTRACT PROVISIONS AND ESTABLISHES A SINGLE STANDARD OF CARE FOR ALABAMA DESIGN PROFESSIONALS

On April 29, 2021, Alabama Governor Kay Ivey signed a new law that prohibits certain type indemnification provisions in professional services contracts and establishes a single standard of care for Alabama design professionals for Alabama projects governed by Alabama law. The new law, titled “Contract requirements for professional services of design professionals,” went into effect on July 1, 2021, under Alabama Code § 41-9A-3 (the “Act”), and applies to all design professional contracts created since that date. Alabama joins states such as Georgia and North Carolina by enacting a state law that seeks to limit financial liability and risk allocation to design professionals in construction contracts.

architects and engineers
ARCHITECT’S CONTRACT TO OBSERVE CONSTRUCTION DID NOT CREATE DUTY TO ENSURE THAT PLUMBING WORK COMPLIED WITH DESIGN PLANS

In Chicago Ambulatory Surgery Associates, Inc. v. Restore Construction, Inc., 2021 WL 4168597 (Ill. App. Sept. 14, 2021), an Illinois court held an architect that contracted to provide design drawings and make regular site visits did not also undertake a duty to inspect plumbing work for compliance with those drawings.

architects and engineers
WHO CAN OFFER A CERTIFICATE OF MERIT AGAINST A DESIGN PROFESSIONAL IN TEXAS

In Barrientos v. Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc., No. 13-20-00092-CV, 2021 WL 3411869 (Tex. App. Aug. 5, 2021), the Court of Appeals of Texas, Corpus Christi-Edinburg held that Texas law mandates that a design professional expert offering opinions against another design professional must be licensed or registered in Texas.

architects and engineers
TENNESSEE APPELLATE COURT RULES STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS AND REPOSE DEFENSES IN CONSTRUCTION CASES SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO THE JURY WHEN FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OR EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL IS AT ISSUE

In Joseph Riccardi v. Carl Little Construction Co., Inc., et al., 2021 WL 3137251 (Tenn. App. July 26, 2021), a Tennessee Appellate Court held that the statute of limitations and statute of repose defenses should be submitted to the jury when fraudulent concealment or equitable estoppel is at issue, even if there is no genuine dispute of material facts.

architects and engineers
WHEN IS AN ARCHITECT REQUIRED TO NOTIFY ITS INSURER

In RLI Insurance Company v. Architrave, Inc., 2021 WL 1863259 (D.S.C. May 7, 2021), a federal court in South Carolina held that a factual issue remained as to when an architect was required to put its insurer on notice of a potential claim.

Bobbitt Design Build (“Bobbitt”) was hired by Mount Moriah Missionary Baptist Church, Inc., (“the Church”) to construct a new worship center. Bobbitt hired Architrave, Inc. (“Architrave”) to design the worship center. Three (3) years after the project was completed, the Church sent two demand letters to all the entities that were associated with the project, including Architrave. The demand letters listed various problems with the HVAC system and water intrusion from the roof, which Architrave contended were unrelated to its work.  Architrave did not report these demand letters to its carrier, RLI Insurance Company (“RLI”).


architects and engineers
ENGINEER’S CONTRACTUAL INDEMNITY CLAIM AGAINST CONTRACTOR DISMISSED, AS INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT EXCLUDED CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES TO THE WORK ITSELF

In County of Saratoga v. Delaware Engineering, D.P.C., 189 A.D.3d 1926, 139 N.Y.S.3d 381 (3d Dept 2020), the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division held that an engineer’s contractual indemnity claim against the contractor was due to be dismissed, as the indemnity provision unambiguously and expressly excluded claims for damage to the “work itself.”

architects and engineers
TEXAS APPELLATE COURT REAFFIRMS HOLDING THAT CERTIFICATE OF MERIT ADDRESSING INDIVIDUAL ENGINEER’S ALLEGED NEGLIGENCE SATISFIES REQUIREMENTS AS TO THE EMPLOYER

In Carlson, Brigance & Doering, Inc. v. Compton, 2020 WL 7233612 (Tex. App. Dec 8, 2020) the Court of Appeals of Texas held that a Certificate of Merit addressing the alleged negligence of an individual engineer does not have to separately address the employer’s alleged negligence arising out of the same acts or omissions. 

architects and engineers
CONSULTING EXPERT RETAINED BY NON PARTY CONTRACTOR DOES NOT ENJOY ATTORNEY CLIENT OR WORK PRODUCT PROTECTIONS

In Curtis Park Group, LLC, v. Allied World Specialty Insurance Co., 2021 WL 1022703 (D. Colo. March 17, 2021), the United States District Court for the District of Colorado held that a report produced by an engineering expert retained by the contractor was discoverable in an action between owner and its insurer, as the report was not created in anticipation of litigation and therefore was not work product.  

architects and engineers
MASSACHUSETTS SUPREME COURT RULES THAT STATUTE OF REPOSE FOR CONSTRUCTION AND DESIGN DEFECT IN MULTI-BUILDING PROJECT RAN WHEN EACH BUILDING WAS SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLETED

In D’Allessandro v. Lennar Hingham Holdings, LLC, 2020 WL 6438937 (Mass. Nov. 3, 2020), the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held the statute of repose governing the claims for design and construction defects for a multi-building condominium project began to run when each building was opened for its intended use or was substantially completed, not when the first building was complete. The condominium in question consisted of twenty-eight (28) buildings built in twenty-four (24) phases between 2008 and 2015. Each building was issued a Certificate of Occupancy when the architect determined the building or units were “substantially complete.”

architects and engineers
NORTH CAROLINA APPELLATE COURT RULES THE LICENSURE DEFENSE DOES NOT BAR CONTRACTOR’S NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS AGAINST DESIGN PROFESSIONALS

In Wright Construction Services, Inc.v. The Hard Art Studio, PLLC, 2020 WL 7906704 (N.C. App. Dec. 31, 2020), a North Carolina appellate court held that the “licensure defense,” which prevents a builder that is unlicensed at the start of a project from recovering in a breach of contract claim, does not apply to negligence claims against design professionals, and is limited only to a builder’s breach of contract claims against owners.

architects and engineers
MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS FINDS ARCHITECT DID NOT OWE PROJECT OWNER A DUTY ABSENT A CONTRACT OR SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP

In Rochester Endoscopy and Surgery Center, LLC and Jaro Company, LLC v. DesRosiers Architects, PC, 2020 WL 6231823 (Mich. App. October 22, 2020), the Court of Appeals of Michigan granted Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the professional negligence claims against the architect. The Rochester Plaintiffs purchased a unit in a condominium, which they intended to convert to a surgical outpatient facility. Plaintiffs hired OYK Engineering & Construction (“OYK”) to serve as the Design-Builder for the project. OYK subcontracted with Desrosiers Architects, PC, (“Desrosiers”) to provide design and architectural services.

architects and engineers
FRAUD CLAIMS ASSERTED BY HOMEOWNER AGAINST ENGINEER DISMISSED FOR LACK OF SPECIFICITY

In Hinman v. ValleyCrest Landscape, Inc. and Aquatic Design & Engineering, Inc., No. 3:19-cv-551, 2020 WL 434161 (M.D. Tenn. Jan. 28, 2020), the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee granted Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the fraud claims alleged against the engineer for lack of specificity in the pleading. 

architects and engineers
NEW YORK APPELLATE COURT RULES OWNERS CLAIM AGAINST ARCHITECT ACCRUED UPON COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT RATHER THAN WHEN DAMAGE WAS DISCOVERED

In Town of West Seneca v. Kideney Architects, P.C., 2020 WL 5867490 (N.Y. App. Oct 2, 2020), a New York appellate court held a project owner’s claim against the architect accrued, and the statute of limitations began, upon completion of the project, rather than discovery of the damage.  Town of West Seneca, the project owner, contracted with an engineering firm for professional services on the project.  The engineering firm then contracted with Kideney Architects (“Kideney”) for architectural services.  The project was certified as substantially complete in 2002.

architects and engineers
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS REAFFIRMS STRICT ADHERENCE TO CERTIFICATE OF MERIT REQUIREMENTS IN CASE INVOLVING ENGINEERING FIRM

Plaintiffs continue to struggle in compliance with Certificate of Merit requirements in Texas. In TRW Engineers, Inc. v. Hussion Street Buildings, LLC, 2020 WL 4457975 (Tex. Ct. App. August 4, 2020), the Texas Court of Appeals held that an engineer’s deposition testimony, which was read into the record by the plaintiff, did not obviate the need for compliance with the certificate-of-merit requirement found in Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 150.002, and accordingly dismissed plaintiff’s unsupported petition.

architects and engineers
NEW YORK ALLOWS ARCHITECT TO SEEK CONTRIBUTION FROM ENGINEER DESPITE NO EXPRESS CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIP

In 22 Gramercy Park, LLC v. Michael Haverland Architect, P.C., 2020 WL 4141384 (N.Y. Cty. Sup. Ct. July 20, 2020), a New York court held an architect that was sued for design defects could not seek common law indemnification from an engineer, but could seek contribution.

architects and engineers
LIMITATION OF LIABILITY PROVISION IN ARCHITECT’S CONTRACT ALSO LIMITED PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE CLAIM
In DMK Development Group, LLC v. Cole + Russel Architects, Inc., 2020 WL 2306894 (S.D. Ohio May 8, 2020), a federal district court in Ohio held that a contractual provision limiting an architect’s potential liability to the amount of the architect’s fee was not limited strictly to breach of contract claims. The Court held the professional negligence claim overlapped the breach of contract claim, and therefore, the limitation provision also applied to the professional negligence claim.
architects and engineers
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS RULES CERTIFICATES OF MERIT ARE REQUIRED IF THE ALLEGED TORTIOUS ACTIONS ORIGINATE, STEM OR RESULT FROM THE PRACTICE OF ENGINEERING

In Whitaker v. R2M Engineering, LLC, 2020 WL 2786941 (Tex. Ct. App, May 28, 2020), the Texas Court of Appeals held that plaintiff’s alleged damages arose out of the provision of professional services by a licensed or registered professional, triggering the Certificate of Merit requirements.

architects and engineers
ECONOMIC LOSS RULE BARS TORT CLAIM AGAINST ENGINEER THAT DESIGNED UPGRADE TO TURBINE CONTROL SYSTEM
In Golden Spread Electric Coop. Inc., v. Emerson Process Management Power & Water Solutions, Inc., 954 F.3d 804 (5th Cir., 2020), the Fifth Circuit, applying Texas law, held the economic loss rule precluded a utility company from pursuing tort claims against a firm that designed an upgrade to the control system for turbine generators.  Golden Spread Electric Cooperative, Inc. (“Golden Spread”), a public utility operating a power generation facility using turbine generators, filed suit against Emerson Process Management Power & Water Solutions, Inc. (“Emerson) for breach of contract and express warranty, negligence, and strict liability. 
architects and engineers
OWNER'S NEGLIGENCE SUIT AGAINST STRUCTURAL ENGINEER UNTIMELY

In Preyde One, LLC v. Hoffman Consultants, LLC, 2020 WL 908943 (Mich. App. Feb. 25, 2020), a Michigan appellate court ruled that a project owner's claim against a structural engineer was a malpractice claim, governed by the malpractice statute of limitations and untimely. Preyde One, LLC ("Owner") sued Glasers Lumber ("Glasers") for breach of contract for allegedly providing defective work and materials on the construction of a hotel. Glasers identified Hoffman Consultants, LLC ("Hoffman"), the structural engineer for the hotel, as a responsible non-party and Owner filed a Second Amended Complaint against Hoffman, alleging Hoffman negligently prepared the drawings and specifications and negligently inspected and supervised the structural work.





architects and engineers
MARYLAND APPELLATE COURT HOLDS A PRIOR AGREEMENT WAS WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE ARBITRATION PROVISION IN A SUBSEQUENT AGREEMENT

In Gannett Fleming, Inc. v. Corman Construction, Inc., 2019 WL 6207616 (Md. App. Nov. 21, 2019), the Maryland Court of Special Appeals held that an arbitration provision contained in a subsequent agreement may still apply to work performed under a prior agreement that did not contain a similar arbitration provision.





architects and engineers
NEW YORK APPELLATE COURT RULES NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS AGAINST ARCHITECT AND ENGINEER ACCRUE WHEN THE CONTRACT TERMINATES RATHER THAN WHEN DAMAGES ARE INCURRED

In WSA Group, PE.,PC v. DKI Engineering & Consulting USA PC, 2019 WL 7173322 (N.Y. App. Dec. 26, 2019), a New York appellate court held that the statute of limitations governing malpractice claims against architects and engineers in New York begins to accrue when the contract is complete and the professional relationship ends, rather than when the plaintiff incurs damages.





architects and engineers
INDEMNITY PROVISION REQUIRING ENGINEER TO INDEMNIFY AN OWNER FOR DAMAGE TO PROPERTY MAY ENCOMPASS ECONOMIC LOSSES IN LOUISIANA

In Couvillion Group, LLC v. Plaquemines Parish Government, 2019 WL 6769614 (La. App. Dec. 11, 2019), Plaquemines Parish Government (“PPG”) contracted with Couvillion Group, LLC (“Couvillion”) to be the general contractor for the Project. PPG contracted with Professional Engineering Consultants Corporation (“PEC”) to provide engineering services for the project.





architects and engineers
FLORIDA APPELLATE COURT HOLDS ARCHITECT’S SUPERVISION WAS SUFFICIENT TO GIVE RISE TO DUTY OWED TO CONTRACTOR

In Grace and Naeem Uddin, Inc. v. Singer Architects, Inc., 278 So. 3d 89 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019), Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeals held an architect had sufficient supervisory control over a contractor to establish a duty of care.  Broward County (the “County”) hired Grace and Naeem Uddin, Inc. (“GNU”), a general contractor, for an improvement project at the Fort Lauderdale Airport (the “Project”). The County hired Singer Architects, Inc. (“Singer”) to provide consulting and administrative services for the Project.





architects and engineers
NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT RULES STATUTE OF REPOSE APPLIES TO INDEMNITY AND CONTRIBUTION CLAIMS AGAINST ARCHITECTS

In Rankin v. South Street Downtown Holdings, Inc., 2019 WL 3562167 (N.H. Aug. 6, 2019), the New Hampshire Supreme Court addressed whether the state’s Statute of Repose applied to indemnity and contribution claims against architects, or only applied to claims for direct losses.  The Court found the statute did apply and imposes a time limit on indemnity claims against architects.





architects and engineers
ARCHITECT’S NEGLIGENT INSPECTION EXPOSES HIM TO LIABILITY FOR PERSONAL INJURY

In Demetro v. Dormitory Authority of the State of New York, 170 A.D. 3d 437 (N.Y. 2019), a New York Appellate Court addressed whether an architect’s failure to identify deviations from its designs subjected the architect to liability for personal injuries as a result of the defective condition. On a Motion for Summary Judgment, the Court found there was a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether a contractor’s deviation from the design, and subsequent failure to correct deviation, was an intervening and superseding cause which relieved the architect from liability.





architects and engineers
ENGINEER DID NOT ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY FOR ALL ASPECTS OF DESIGN WHEN HE STAMPED THE DRAWINGS THAT DID NOT INCLUDE A WELD DESIGN

In Novum Structures, LLC v. Larson Engineering, Inc., 2019 WL 1924878 (E.D. Wis. April 30, 2019), a Wisconsin District Court addressed whether an engineer’s sealing of design drawings makes the engineer the “Engineer of Record” and establishes a duty to verify the accuracy of the entire design. In 2014, Novum Structures, LLC (“Novum”) was hired to build a glass enclosed atrium. Novum prepared design drawings and supporting calculations for the atrium’s steel structure, but the drawings did not specify the type of welds that would be used to connect trusses to beams.





architects and engineers
UTAH COURT OF APPEALS RULES ECONOMIC LOSS RULE BARS PROPERTY OWNERS’ CLAIMS AGAINST GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING FIRM

In Hayes v. Intermountain GeoEnvironmental Services, Inc., 2019 WL 2621931 (Utah Ct. App. June 27, 2019), the Utah Court of Appeals upheld the economic loss rule, finding a property owners’ tort claims against a geotechnical engineer were barred. In 2004, a developer hired Intermountain GeoEnvironmental Services, Inc. (“IGES”) to conduct a geotechnical investigation for a proposed subdivision. IGES concluded construction could proceed and the developer sold the lots to a third-party, who later sold an individual lot to Kim and Nancy Hayes (the “Hayes”) for construction of a home.





architects and engineers
TEXAS SUPREME COURT RULES ENGINEER’S CONDUCT EVIDENCED INTENTIONAL WAIVER OF CERTIFICATE OF MERIT REQUIREMENT
In LaLonde v. Gosnell, 2019 WL 2479172 (Tex. June 14, 2019), the Texas Supreme Court held an engineer’s engagement in the judicial process, through the completion of discovery and until one month before trial, waived the Certificate of Merit requirements.




architects and engineers
FLORIDA APPELLATE COURT HOLDS STATUTE OF REPOSE DOES NOT APPLY TO CLAIM ALLEGING NEGLIGENT INSPECTION
In Manney v. MBV Engineering, Inc., 2019 WL 2079379 (Fla. 5th DCA May 10, 2019), the Fifth District Circuit Court of Appeals of Florida held the statute of repose did not apply to a homeowner’s claim against an engineer for negligently inspecting a newly constructed home because the inspection did not qualify as the design, planning or construction of an improvement to real property.




architects and engineers
MAINE FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT HOLDS ECONOMIC LOSS DOCTRINE PRECLUDES NEGLIGENCE ACTION
In Fletch’s Sandblasting & Painting, Inc. v. Fay, Spofford, and Thorndike LLC, 2019 WL 847731 (D.Me. Feb. 21, 2019), the Federal District Court held that a subcontractor that was not in contractual privity with an engineer could not seek to recover its economic losses caused by the engineer’s alleged negligent design due to the economic loss doctrine.




architects and engineers
MISSISSIPPI SUPREME COURT RULES ENGINEER DID NOT HAVE DUTY TO WARN OF DANGEROUS CONDITIONS
In Waltman v. Engineering Plus, Inc., 2019 WL 1071533 (Miss. March 7, 2019), the Mississippi Supreme Court held that an engineering firm providing engineering services for a roof repair did not have a duty to warn a roofing company’s employee of a dangerous condition.




architects and engineers
RHODE ISLAND SUPREME COURT RULES ENGINEER THAT PREPARED DOCUMENTS FOR PUBLIC BIDDING DID NOT OWE DUTY TO GENERAL CONTRACTOR
In John Rocchio Corporation v. Pare Engineering Corporation, 2019 WL 575822 (R.I. Feb 13, 2019), the Warwick Sewer Authority (“WSA”) contracted with Pare Engineering Corporation (“Pare”) to provide pre-bid services, including preparing a Request For Proposal (“RFP”) to be provided to general contractors submitting bids.  Pare completed the RFP and WSA received bids from five companies.  John Rocchio Corporation (“Rocchio”) submitted the lowest bid and DiGregorio, Inc. (“DiGregorio”) submitted the second lowest bid.




architects and engineers
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS RULES ENGINEERS MAY NOT PROVIDE CERTIFICATES OF MERIT IN SUITS AGAINST ARCHITECTS
In Kayne Anderson Capital Advisors, L.P. v. Hill & Frank, Inc., 2018 WL 6613656 (Tex. Ct. App., Dec. 18, 2018), the Texas Court of Appeals held an engineer’s affidavit does not satisfy the Certificate of Merit requirement in a suit against an architect.




architects and engineers
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS OF FLORIDA UPHELD THE ADMISSIBILITY OF EXPERT TESTIMONY PURSUANT TO DAUBERT BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY WAS NOT BASED ON NEW SCIENTIFIC METHODS

In D.R. Horton, Inc. – Jacksonville v. Heron’s Landing Condo. Assoc. of Jacksonville, Inc., 2018 WL 6803698 (Fla. 1st DCA Dec. 27, 2018), the District Court of Appeals of Florida, affirmed the trial court’s decision to allow expert testimony related to construction defects, even though the testimony was admitted pursuant to the Daubert standard, rather than the Frye standard.  The Court held the expert’s opinion was admissible under both Daubert and Frye





architects and engineers
PENNSYLVANIA SUPERIOR COURT HOLDS THE CERTIFICATE OF MERIT REQUIREMENT DOES NOT APPLY TO THIRD PARTY CLAIMS RELATED TO PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS
In Kelly Systems, Inc. v. Leonard S. Fiore, Inc., 2018 WL 5629644 (Pa. Super. Ct. October 31, 2018), the Pennsylvania Superior Court held the requirement to file a Certificate of Merit to support a professional negligence claim does not apply to third party complaints.




architects and engineers
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS HOLDS THAT AGGREGATE ANALYSIS DOES CONSTITUTE THE PRACTICE OF ENGINEERING
In Ronald R. Wagner & Co., LP v. Apex Geoscience Inc. and Braun Intertec Corporation, 2018 WL 4344713 (Tex. Ct. App., Sept. 18, 2018), the Texas Court of Appeals held that preparation of an aggregate analysis report was not exempt from the Texas Engineering Practice Act.  Ronald R. Wagner & Co., LP (“Wagner”), a contractor specializing in the application of pavement sealer and pavement surface treatment, bid a road project for the Texas Department of Transportation (“TXDOT”).  Wagner received quotes for materials for the project from Advantage Asphalt of Lubbock, LLC (“Advantage”) and Advanced Pavement Maintenance, Ltd. (“Advanced”), which offered to supply Wagner with B-4 Aggregate.  Apex Geoscience, Inc. (“Apex”), who was acquired by Braun Intertec Corporation (“Braun”), issued an Aggregate Analysis Report finding the B-4 aggregates met the TXDOT specifications for the project.




architects and engineers
LOUISIANA FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT RULES CONTRACTOR COULD NOT RECOVER FOR ACTS OF CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION MADE BY ARCHITECT IN GOOD FAITH
In Patriot Contracting, LLC v. Star Insurance Company, 2018 WL 1123586 (U.S. Dist. Ct., E.D. La.), the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana ruled that exculpatory clauses in the general contract benefitting the architect were enforceable.




architects and engineers
DESIGN PROFESSIONALS MAY OWE A DUTY DIRECTLY TO CONTRACTORS FOR DEFECTIVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
In Suffolk Construction Co., Inc v. Rodriquez Quiroga Architects, et al., 2018 WL 1335185 (U.S. Dist. Ct., S.D. Fla. Mar 15, 2018), the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida held that an architect and engineer breached owed a duty to the contractor by providing design plans which the contractor relied upon.




architects and engineers
INDIANA FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT CLARIFIES THE REQUIREMENTS FOR APPLICATION OF ECONOMIC LOSS DOCTRINE
In City of Whiting, Indiana v. Whitney, Bailey, Cox, & Magnani, LLC, 2018 WL 1400890 (U.S. Dist. Ct., N.D. Ind. March 20, 2018), the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana held that an owner’s tort claim for damage caused by the failure of a retaining wall designed by a subconsulting engineering firm was barred because all claimed damages were to the overall project and therefore barred by Indiana’s economic loss doctrine.




architects and engineers
THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MICHIGAN HOLDS THAT AN ARCHITECT OWED NO COMMON LAW DUTY TO OWNER FOR ALLEGED PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE
In Auburn Hills Tax Increment Finance Authority v. Haussman Construction Co., 2018 WL 385057 (Mich. Ct. App. January 11, 2018), the Michigan Court of Appeals held that the owner of a construction project could not maintain a professional negligence claim against the architect for failing to adequately review payment applications.




architects and engineers
THE SECOND CIRCUIT HOLDS A PROVISION FOR SEALED DRAWINGS DOES NOT SUFFICIENTLY LINK THE OWNER AND DESIGN PROFESSIONAL FOR PURPOSES OF CONTRACTUAL PRIVITY EQUIVALENCE TO ALLOW A DIRECT SUIT BY THE OWNER AGAINST THE DESIGN PROFESSIONAL

In Stapleton v. Barret Crane Design & Engineering, 2018 WL 985775, (2nd Cir. 2018), the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit found that contractual privity, or its functional equivalent, did not exist between an owner and engineering firm retained by the design-builder, because there was no contract between the parties and the parties did not communicate directly to sufficiently “link” them.





architects and engineers
COURT OF APPEALS OF TEXAS HOLDS THE CERTIFICATE OF MERIT REQUIREMENT DOES NOT APPLY TO THIRD PARTY CONTRIBUTION CLAIMS

In Engineering and Terminal Services, L.P. v. TARSCO and Orcus Fire Protection, LLC, 525 S.W. 3d 394 (TX 2018), the Court of Appeals of Texas held the statutory requirement to file a Certificate of Merit along with a lawsuit based on professional negligence of an engineer does not apply to third party claims for contribution.





architects and engineers
CALIFORNIA FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT EXTENDS SPEARIN DOCTRINE TO A DESIGN BUILD PROJECT

In U.S. for benefit of Bonita Pipeline, Inc. v. Balfour Beatty Construction LLC, et. al., 2017 WL 2869721 (U.S. Dist. Ct., S.D. Cal.), the United States District Court for the Southern District of California ruled the Spearin Doctrine, in which an entity providing plans or specifications is liable for deficiencies in the plans or specifications, applies to subcontractors in design-build projects, even when plans or specifications are by definition meant to be further refined by the subcontractor.





architects and engineers
MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS HOLDS CLAIMS AGAINST ENGINEER ARE BARRED BY THE DOCTRINE OF ACCORD AND SATISFACTION

In Triangle Construction Company, Inc. v. Fouche and Associates, Inc., 218 So. 3d 1180 (Mississippi 2017), Triangle Construction Company, Inc. (“Triangle”) contracted with East Madison Water Association (“EMWA”) to build a water system in Madison and Leake Counties in Mississippi.  The contract designated Fouche and Associates (“Fouche”) as the project engineer, although Fouche was not a signatory to the contract.  Triangle nevertheless argued Fouche was a party to the contract because Fouche’s seal was affixed to the contract’s cover, was designated as the project engineer and was designated as the agent and representative of the owner.





architects and engineers
SUPREME COURT OF MONTANA RULES LIMITATION OF LIABILITY IS ENFORCEABLE IN A CONTRACT ACTION AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT CONTRACT AWAY ALL LIABILITY, BUT NOT IN A PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE ACTION

In Zirkelbach Construction, Inc. v. DOWL, LLC, 402 P.3d 1244 (Mont. 2017), the Supreme Court of Montana ruled design professionals can contract to limit liability for a contract claim, even if the limitation is a nominal percentage of the overall fees paid, as long as the parties do not disclaim all liability outright. However, the Court held that the limitation did not apply to the negligence claim in the suit.

architects and engineers
CALIFORNIA COURT OF APPEALS HOLDS THAT THE RELATION BACK DOCTRINE DOES NOT APPLY TO THE CERTIFICATE OF MERIT REQUIREMENT IN PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE ACTIONS AGAINST ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS

In Curtis Engineering Corporation v. Superior Court of San Diego, 16 Cal. App. 5th 542 (Cal. App. Ct. 2017), the Court of Appeals for the Fourth District of California addressed the impact of the relation-back doctrine on the certificate of merit law in professional negligence actions against design professionals.  California’s certificate of merit law, codified in the Business and Professions Code, Section 411.35, requires an attorney to consult with an architect or engineer in the same discipline before filing a complaint against a licensed architect or registered professional engineer and certify that, based on the consultation, there is reasonable and meritorious cause for filing the complaint.  If an attorney is unable to obtain a consultation prior to the running of the statute of limitations, the law provides that a certificate of merit may be filed within sixty (60) days after the filing of the complaint.

architects and engineers
ILLINOIS COURT OF APPEALS AFFIRMS DESIGN PROFESSIONALS NOT LIABLE FOR BREACH OF WARRANTY OF HABITABILITY DESPITE CONTRACTOR’S INSOLVENCY

In Sierra Court Condominium Association v. Champion Aluminum Corporation, 2017 IL App (1st) 143364, 75 N.E.3d 260 (Ill. Ct. App. 2017), First District Appellate Court of Illinois reaffirmed architects and engineering firms are not subject to the implied warranty of habitability of construction, even in the event the developer and general contractor are insolvent. 




architects and engineers
OREGON SUPREME COURT HOLDS THAT THE PRACTICE OF ARCHITECTURE INCLUDES THE DEVELOPMENT OF MASTER PLANS

In Twist Architecture & Design, Inc. v. Oregon Board of Architect Examiners, 361 Or. 507, 395 P.3d 574 (Or. 2017), the Supreme Court of Oregon ruled that the “practice of architecture” includes the preparation of master plans drawn to scale for the development of a project, even if construction drawings or specifications are not ultimately produced. 




architects and engineers
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ANALYZES ARCHITECTURAL COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT BETWEEN TWO HOMEBUILDERS

In Sedgewick Homes, LLC v. Stillwater Homes, Inc., 2017 WL 3221488 (W.D. NC. 2017), the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina ruled there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Stillwater Homes, Inc. (“Stillwater”) infringed upon the copyrighted architectural plans of its competitor, Sedgewick Homes, LLC (“Sedgewick”). Sedgewick and Stillwater are home builders in North Carolina, who both interacted with two customers, the Bivins and the Shoemakers.




architects and engineers
SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION IS DETERMINABLE BY COURTS DESPITE ARCHITECT’S OPINION

In Parkcrest Builders, LLC v. Housing Authority of New Orleans, 2017 WL 3394033 (E.D. LA. 2017), the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana held the Court could determine whether substantial completion had been achieved, despite a contract provision assigning this determination to the Architect.




architects and engineers
FLORIDA COURT OF APPEALS DETERMINES DESIGN PROFESSIONAL MUST HOLD LICENSE TO BE SUED FOR PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE

In Sunset Beach Investments, LLC v. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., 207 So. 3d 1012 (Fla. Ct. App. 2017), the Fourth District Court of Appeal of Florida held an engineering intern could not be liable for professional negligence.  The Court explained an “engineer intern” could not be considered a professional because he does not maintain a license.




architects and engineers
MISSOURI COURT OF APPEALS INTERPRETS STATUTE REGARDING WHAT IS INCIDENTAL TO THE PRACTICE OF ARCHITECTURE

In Curtis v. Miss. Board For Architects, Prof. Engineers, Prof. Land Surveyors, and Prof. Landscape Architects, No. WD 80174, 2017 WL 2241516 (Mo. Ct. App. May 23, 2017), the Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed the Missouri Board of Architects, Professional Engineers, Professional Land Surveyors, and Professional Landscape Architects’ (the “Board”) disciplinary order against an architect for violations of a previous probation order.  Donald Dustin Curtis was an architect based in Arizona and licensed in multiple jurisdictions, including Missouri.  Mr. Curtis’s license was placed on probation in Missouri for one year after he failed to inform the Board of disciplinary action in Nevada.  As part of his probation Mr. Curtis was required to submit his plans for any projects in Missouri to the Board for review.


architects and engineers
SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS CLARIFIES HOW CERTIFYING EXPERT MAY DEMONSTRATE KNOWLEDGE OF THE DEFENDANT DESIGN PROFESSIONAL’S AREA OF PRACTICE PURSUANT TO TEXAS’S CERTIFICATE OF MERIT STATUTE

In Melden & Hunt, Inc. v. East Rio Hondo Water Supply Corporation, No. 16-0078, 2017 WL 2492006 (Tex. June 9, 2017), East Rio Hondo Water Supply Corp. contracted with Melden & Hunt, Inc. to provide engineering-design and project-supervision services for a new water-treatment plant in San Benito, Texas. Following substantial completion of the project, East Rio complained about the quality of water treated at the plant and attributed the water-quality issues to the plant’s design and construction. East Rio subsequently filed a complaint against Melden & Hunt asserting claims for breach of contract, breach of express and implied warranties, negligence, and negligent misrepresentation.




architects and engineers
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK GRANTS AN ARCHITECT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST CROSS CLAIMS FOR INDEMNIFICATION AND CONTRIBUTION BASED ON CONSTRUCTION DEVIATIONS FROM THE ARCHITECT’S DESIGN

In Corwin v. NYC Bike Share, LLC, No. 14-CV-1285, 2017 WL 1399034 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 13, 2017), the Southern District of New York granted a Motion for Summary Judgment in favor of Alta Planning + Design + Architecture of New York, PLLC (“APD”) against the City of New York (the “City”) based on deviations from APD’s design of a bike share station which the Court concluded constituted an intervening cause of the alleged damage.




architects and engineers
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO DENIES A MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BASED ON THE PLAIN MEANING OF AN ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACT

In United States of America v. Osborne, No. 4:11-CV-1029, 2017 WL 1135640 (N.D. Ohio March 27, 2017), the Northern District of Ohio denied a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Third-Party Defendant William R. Gray Associates, Inc. (“Gray”) based on the permit procurement obligations in Gray’s agreement for engineering services with Third-Party Plaintiff City of Willoughby (the “City”).




architects and engineers
TEXAS’S CERTIFICATE OF MERIT STATUTE REQUIRES CERTIFYING EXPERT TO DEMONSTRATE KNOWLEDGE OF THE DEFENDANT DESIGN PROFESSIONAL’S AREA OF PRACTICE

In Levinson Alcoser Associates, L.P. v. El Pistolón II, LTD., No. 15-0232, 2017 WL 727269 (Tex. Feb. 24, 2017), the Supreme Court of Texas held Texas’s recently amended Certificate of Merit statute requires a plaintiff to accompany his complaint not only with a sworn Certificate of Merit from an expert stating the claim has merit, but also, the Certificate of Merit must demonstrate the expert has knowledge of the area of practice to which the complaint relates.




architects and engineers
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT AFFIRMS A LOWER COURT’S DECISION GRANTING A MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BASED ON THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EXCLUSIONARY PROVISION IN A COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY POLICY.

In Orchard, Hiltz & McCliment, Inc. v. Phoenix Insurance Co., Nos. 16-1176 & 16-1231, 2017 WL 244787 (6th Cir. 2017), the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed a lower court’s grant of Summary Judgment against the Engineer, Orchard, Hiltz & McCliment, Inc. (“OHM”)...

architects and engineers
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY REVERSES A LOWER COURT’S DECISION GRANTING A MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BASED ON THE ECONOMIC LOSS DOCTRINE.
In D.W. Wilburn, Inc. v. K. Norman Berry Associates, Architects, PLLC, No. 2015-CA-1254-MR (Ky. Ct. App. Dec. 22, 2016), the Kentucky Court of Appeals reversed a lower court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Third-Party Defendant K. Norman Berry Associates, Architects, PLLC, the architect hired by the Oldham County Board of Education to design the North Oldham High School.
architects and engineers
APPELLATE COURT AFFIRMS GRANT OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT BASED ON ILLINOIS’ CONTRIBUTION ACT

 In Sandlin v. Harrah’s Illinois Corp., 2016 WL 4585932 (App. Ct. Ill. September 2, 2016), the Appellate Court of Illinois (the “Appellate Court”) affirmed a lower court’s grant of Summary Judgment for Cross-Claim Defendant Hnedak Bobo Group, Inc. (“HBG”)  dismissing Cross-Claim Plaintiff Harrah’s Illinois Corporation (“Harrah’s) claims for contribution.  

architects and engineers
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT GRANTS DEFENDANT ARCHITECT’S MOTION TO DECIDE QUESTIONS OF LAW AND TO DISPENSE WITH JURY TRIAL BASED ON THE STATUTE OF REPOSE

 In Town of Windsor v. Loureiro Engineering Assoc., 2016 WL 4007747 (Conn. Super. Ct. June 20, 2016), the Superior Court of Connecticut (the “Superior Court”) granted a Motion to Decide Questions of Law and to Dispense with a Jury Trial filed by Defendants Loureiro Engineering, Inc., Newman Architects, LLC, Herbert S. Newman, and Michael Raso (collectively, “Defendants”), the engineer and architects hired by Plaintiff the Town of Windsor (the “Town”) to design the Windsor High School auditorium.  

architects and engineers
DISTRICT COURT GRANTS ENGINEER’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS BASED ON THE ECONOMIC LOSS DOCTRINE

In Venturedyne, Ltd. v. Carbonyx Inc., 2016 WL 3402807 (N.D. Ind. June 21, 2016), the Northern District of Indiana (the “District Court”) granted a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings filed by Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant Venturedyne, Ltd. d/b/a Scientific Dust Collectors (“SDC”), an engineer hired by Defendant/Crossclaimant Carbonyx, Inc. (“Carbonyx”), to design and manufacture dust collection systems. 

architects and engineers
ILLINOIS APPELLATE COURT REFUSES TO EXTEND THE IMPLIED WARRANTY OF HABITABILITY TO ARCHITECTS

In Bd. of Managers of Film Exchange Lofts Condo. Ass’n v. Fitzgerald Associates Architects, P.C., 2016 WL 2841978 (Ill. App. May 11, 2016), the Appellate Court of Illinois consolidated three appeals and affirmed the lower courts’ decisions not to extend the implied warranty of habitability to architects. All three consolidated cases involved condominium boards bringing actions against architects for breach of the implied warranty of habitability, a claim typically alleged against the developer.

architects and engineers
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, AFFIRMS TRIAL COURT ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT ARCHITECT’S MOTION TO DISMISS BASED ON THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS, APPLYING THE CONTINUOUS REPRESENTATION DOCTRINE

In Bronstein v. Omega Construction Group, Inc., 2016 WL 1577185 (N.Y. App. April 20, 2016), the Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, affirmed a lower court’s denial of a Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendant Michael T. Cetera, an architect hired by Plaintiffs to provide architectural services.  In 2006, Plaintiffs entered into an agreement with Mr. Cetera to prepare plans for an addition to their residence.

NEWSLETTER
VISIT US