Representative Construction Defect Cases

  • We represented a concrete cutting contractor accused of causing several million dollars- worth of damage (including substantial consequential damages) based on an alleged damage to a grade beam in a refurbished multi-unit commercial building. After a contentious discovery battle and numerous procedural complications, we were able to demonstrate to the general contractor that it did not have an enforceable contractual indemnity clause in its subcontract with our client. We were also able to establish that the alleged consequential damages could not be attributed to our client’s work. We also demonstrated that our client had simply cut where he had been instructed to cut, and that if any damage had resulted from the concrete cutting, it was a result of the general contractor’s instructions rather than the cutting itself. As a result, we were able to negotiate a favorable settlement with the plaintiff/building owner as well as obtain a good faith settlement determination. We also rallied many of the subcontractors and coordinated defense efforts to respond to discovery and procedural disputes generated by both the plaintiff and the general contractor.
  • We represented a subcontractor in a series of homeowner suits related to a multi-phased housing development in the Santa Barbara area. We were able to demonstrate to the general contractor that the plaintiffs' defect lists did not implicate the insureds work, ultimately obtaining dismissals for a waiver of costs.
  • We represented a contractor who had performed repair work on a commercial building, and who was subsequently accused of causing water intrusion into the building, leading to mold contamination. Through discovery and investigation, we established that the water intrusion had resulted from other work performed by the building owner and/or by the tenant. As a result, we were able to negotiate a favorable settlement for the client.
  • We represented a contractor sued on a six-figure cross-complaint in response to its own suit for unpaid fees against the homeowner. Through discovery, we were able to discredit the cross-complainant's various, meritless allegations of defect and damage. Ultimately, the case was settled with the client recovering virtually the entirety of its unpaid fees and the cross-complainant receiving nothing for its cross-complaint.
  • We represented a tile subcontractor in a dispute arising out of a multi-million dollar home. The client was accused by the general contractor of negligently installing tile work in an indoor/outdoor spa. During the litigation, we established that the errors that led to the separation of the tile work from the spa walls resulted from errors committed by the general contactor, not our client. The case settled at mediation for a small fraction of the amount originally sought by the general contractor on the subcontract.

Primary Contact: Jason M. Booth