714.701.9180
CONSTRUCTION DEFECT NEWS
Clocks in black background

Florida Statutes provide design and construction companies with a formidable defense.

Construction Defect Claim Not Timely Filed

Monday, January 27, 2020 — Ryan M. Charlson - Florida Construction Law News

If construction defect claims are not timely filed, Florida Statutes provide design and construction companies with a formidable defense. As a case in point, a Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge issued an Order granting summary judgment based on Fla. Stat. § 95.11(3)(c), Florida’s Statute of Limitations governing actions founded on alleged construction defects.

In Covenant Baptist Church, Inc. v. Vasallo Construction, Inc. and Lemartec Engineering & Construction Corporation, Plaintiff alleged multiple construction defects against two Defendants. The alleged defects were focused on water intrusion through the roofing systems and were known to the Plaintiff on August 13, 2006. However, four years and eleven months later, Plaintiff filed suit acknowledging that the building had “been plagued with water intrusion issues for a number of years,” and that Plaintiff’s complaints “regarding the water intrusion [had] been met largely with ‘band-aid’ type ineffective repairs.”

Lemartec Engineering & Construction Corporation (“Lemartec”), filed a Motion for Summary Judgment as to multiple counts and rested its Motion squarely on the shoulders of Florida’s four-year statute of limitations. Importantly, the statute begins to run “where there has been notice of an invasion of legal rights or a person has been put on notice of his right to a cause of action” Snyder v. Wernecke, 813 So.2d 213,216 (Fla 4th DCA 2002) (citing City of Miami v. Brooks, 70 So.2d 306 (Fla. 1954)). Plaintiff attempted to bypass the four-year nature of the statute by trying to classify the defects in question as latent.

Reprinted courtesy of Ryan M. Charlson, Cole, Scott & Kissane

Mr. Charlson may be contacted at Ryan.Charlson@csklegal.com

Read the full story…
Scales of justice

Tred R. Eyerly discusses Fontaine Bros. v. Acadia Ins. Co.

Insurer Granted Summary Judgment on Denial of Construction Defect Claim

Monday, January 27, 2020 — Tred R. Eyerly - Insurance Law Hawaii

The court granted the insurer's motion for summary judgment, confirming there was no duty to defend or indemnify a construction defect claim against the insured. Fontaine Bros. v. Acadia Ins. Co., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148056 (D. Mass. Aug. 29, 2019).

The City of Worcester contracted with Fontaine Brothers, Inc. to install a new ice refrigeration system at the City's indoor ice rink. After construction, the condensers in two chiller units eroded and stopped operating.

The City sued Fontaine for the costs of leasing temporary chillers and installing new ones. The City alleged that Fontaine installed condensers with carbon steel tubes instead of contractually required stainless stell tubes.Further, Fontaine and its subcontractors did not adequately maintain the condensers, in breach of the contract.

Fontaine's insurer, Acadia Insurance Company, denied coverage. Fontaine sued Acadia. The court noted that the City's complaint plainly alleged faulty workmanship by Fontaine. However, the City's complaint did not allege that Fontaine intended the condensers to corrode and left open the possibility that Fontaine was unaware of any potential problem or did not foresee the corrosion likely to result from the use of carbon steel components or the maintenance work being done by its subcontractor. Therefore, the Cit's complaint did not foreclose the possibility that the corrosion resulting from Fontaine's alleged faulty workmanship and maintenance might be shown to be an unforeseen or unintended consequence of reckless or negligent conduct. Accordingly, it was possible that there was an occurrence under the policy language.

Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert

Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

Read the full story…
Bills coming out of laptop

The coverage litigation arose out of a construction defect case against a general contractor.

Duty to Defend Broadly Applies to Entire Action; Insured Need Not Apportion Defense Costs, Says Maryland Appeals Court

Monday, January 27, 2020 — Michael S. Levine & Kevin V. Small - Hunton Insurance Recovery Blog

In a recent decision, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals reiterated that the duty to defend broadly requires a liability insurer to defend an entire lawsuit against its insured, even where only some of the allegations are potentially covered. The court further held that the insured has no obligation to apportion defense costs among multiple implicated policies. The decision, Selective Way Insurance Company v. Nationwide Property and Casualty Insurance Company, et al., can be found here.

The coverage litigation arose out of a construction defect case against a general contractor. The general contractor tendered the action to its insurer, Nationwide, which, in turn, filed a declaratory judgment action against the various insurers of construction project subcontractors that had named the general contractor as an additional insured. Ultimately, the court granted a summary judgment motion declaring that all of the subcontractors’ insurers had a duty to defend the general contractor “because the allegations in the underlying lawsuit raised claims that potentially arose from the [s]ubcontractors’ work at the [construction site].” All of the subcontractors’ insurers settled with Nationwide except for one, Selective Way; and the parties proceeded to a jury trial on various issues. The jury found for Nationwide on all issues. Selective Way appealed.

Selective Way argued on appeal that even if some of the allegations were covered under its policy, it had no obligation to defend the general contractor because its insureds, the subcontractors, could not have been responsible for all of the losses given the nature of their work. Further, Selective Way contended that if it was responsible for defending the general contractor, it was not responsible for the entire defense, and the general contractor was responsible for apportioning the costs among the various subcontractors. The panel disagreed on both points.

Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Kevin V. Small, Hunton Andrews Kurth
Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com
Mr. Small may be contacted at ksmall@HuntonAK.com


Read the full story…
714.701.9180

FedBizOpps (FBO) is No More. It’s SAM’s Time Now.

January 27, 2020 — Alexander Gorelik - Smith Currie

The Federal Government celebrated Veterans day in an unusual way this year. Over the long weekend, it finally decommissioned its long-time registry for bidding opportunities: www.fbo.gov. From now on, the Government will post all of its future solicitations on a successor site at beta.sam.gov. All of the previously issued solicitations have been moved over to the new site as well. Contractors do not need an account in order to search the new system, but will have to create one in order to follow (and receive updates about) a solicitation or save any searches.

Mr. Gorelik may be contacted at agorelik@smithcurrie.com

714.701.9180

Third Circuit Remands Denial of Coverage Based on Expected and Intended Definition of Occurrence

January 27, 2020 — Tred R. Eyerly - Insurance Law Hawaii

While affirming the district court's denial of coverage under policies that defined occurrence as an accident, the Third Circuit remanded for further consideration of the policies containing an expected and intended definition of occurrence. Sapa Extrusions, Inc. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 27668 (Sept. 13, 2019).

Sapa manufactured aluminum extruded profiles which were used for door and window frames. A pretreatment coating process was used in several aluminum clad windows and doors. Several stages were involved including cleaning and degreasing to remove organic and inorganic materials, chemical etching, and chemical coating to assist with paint adherence. For decades, Sapa supplied profiles to Marvin Lumber and Cedar Company. Marvin incorporated these extrusions with other materials to manufacture aluminum doors and windows. If an extrusion was defective, the whole window or door would have to be replaced. Between 2000 and 2010, Sapa sold 28 million windows and doors.

Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

714.701.9180

Millennial Homebuyers Drive Need for Early Childhood Education Construction

January 27, 2020 — Travis Waldrop - Construction Executive

Millennials are now the largest generation in the world, and they are shaping everything from the housing market to consumer trends, according to the Pew Research Center. The ever-growing age cohort’s spending power is expected to reach $1.4 trillion annually in 2020, according to Accenture; as they have started to settle down and form families of their own, according to the National Association of Realtors, they have also become one of the most active generations of homebuyers in the nation. .

As real estate developers, builders and land owners compete for millennials’ spending power and better understand their buying motivations, they will need to determine which amenities are a must-have to generate loyalty to an area and long-term ROI.

Reprinted courtesy of Travis Waldrop, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved.

714.701.9180

ABA’s 2020 Forum on Construction Law Trial Academy

January 27, 2020 — Beverley BevenFlorez – CDJ Staff

The American Bar Association (ABA) presents a three-day program featuring a “factual scenario” that “focuses on issues commonly encountered in construction projects to teach the skills that are needed to successfully try a construction dispute.” Attendees of this training program will “also learn the skills needed to effectively present their opinions in a construction case.”

March 4th-7th, 2020
George L Allen Sr Courts Building
600 Commerce Street
Dallas, TX 75202-4606

714.701.9180
Featured Experts For More Visit Us At:
www.constructiondefectjournal.com

Construction and Design Consulting Expert Witness area area area

Builders Standard of Care Expert Witness and Consulting General Contractor area area area

Builders Standard of Care Expert Witness and Consulting General Contractor area area area

Villa luxury home

Attorney Lian Skaf analyzes Maddox v. Olshan Found. Repair & Waterproofing Co. of Nashville.

Tennessee Looks to Define Improvements to Real Property

Monday, January 27, 2020 — Lian Skaf - The Subrogation Strategist

For subrogation practitioners dealing with an installation-based statute of repose, knowing what is an improvement to real property is the first battle in what can, but does not have to be, a long fight. Like many other states, Tennessee’s statute of repose bars claims based on improvements to real property. Tennessee’s statute of repose runs four years after substantial completion of the improvement. See Tennessee Code Ann. § 28-3-202. In the case of Maddox v. Olshan Found. Repair & Waterproofing Co. of Nashville, L.P., E A, 2019 Tenn.App. LEXIS 464, 2019 WL 4464816, the Court of Appeals of Tennessee examined whether or not the work done by the defendant, Olshan Foundation Repair & Waterproofing Co. of Nashville, L.P., E.A. (Olshan) — which addressed bowing walls, cracks in the foundation and walls and water intrusion — qualified as improvements to real property for the purposes of the statute of repose. The court held that the work by Olshan essentially amounted to repairs, and did not qualify as improvements to real property.

In Maddox, the plaintiff, Rachel Maddox (Maddox), noticed cracking in her home in 2005 and hired Olshan to assess the issue and conduct necessary repairs. Olshan made several recommendations and the parties agreed on Olshan’s proposal for the price of $27,000. From their initial work in 2005 until late 2011, Olshan visited the property several times to address ongoing structural issues with the home. Eventually, eight months after Olshan told Maddox they could not fix the house and failed to return her phone calls, Maddox filed suit, alleging fraud against the company.

After a three-day bench trial, the trial court found in favor of the plaintiff for $187,000, plus $15,0000 in punitive damages. Among other holdings, the court rejected Olshan’s statute of repose defense. Olshan appealed, raising the statute of repose issue again.

Reprinted courtesy of Lian Skaf, White and Williams LLP

Mr. Skaf may be contacted at skafl@whiteandwilliams.com

Read the full story…
Construction workers on scaffold adding solar to house

Millennials comprise an increasing proportion of the workforce, home-buying population, and individuals influencing the future of real estate development in the U.S.

Sustainability Puts Down Roots in Real Estate

Monday, January 27, 2020 — Stephanie Amaru - Gravel2Gavel Construction & Real Estate Law Blog

Sustainability has evolved from a passing trend or niche preference into an undeniable, growing driver of the real estate market. This is particularly true as millennials comprise an increasing proportion of the workforce, home-buying population, and individuals influencing the future of real estate development in the United States.

If anything illustrates the significance of younger generations’ increasing interest in sustainability, it is the Global Climate Strike that drew participation of many thousands of young people, with 2,500 events scheduled in over 150 countries. In New York City, 1.1 million public school students were excused from school to join the strike in an event planned to precede the UN Summit, which itself was intended to push countries toward a commitment to faster transition to renewable energy and stricter climate targets. While both policymakers and citizens of previous generations have been split on their willingness to address global climate change with urgency, younger generations are feeling a stronger sense of responsibility for curbing the world’s trajectory towards a climate catastrophe, which will be inherited by them and their children. This has manifested in action that promotes awareness of and political action with respect to these issues—such as the Global Climate Strike—as well as evolving habits and preferences in both consumer goods and real estate.

Greener Space
In recent years, real estate developers have recognized that there is a market for “greener” developments that reduce annual expenditures on buildings, whether it be through small spaces requiring less electricity and promoting energy efficiency, or through renewable energy options such as solar photovoltaic power. Some real estate developers have chosen to install these options themselves, while others seek out sustainable financing options to cover the costs of renewable energy. If installing renewable energy is too costly, real estate developers will seek out more cost-effective locations for their brick-and-mortar operations.

Reprinted courtesy of Stephanie Amaru, Pillsbury

Ms. Amaru may be contacted at stephanie.amaru@pillsburylaw.com

Read the full story…
Red pencil on Construction Contract

Contractors could face hurdles in trying to recover acceleration damages under a valid no-damage-for-delay clause.

Does a No-Damage-for-Delay Clause Also Preclude Acceleration Damages?

Monday, January 27, 2020 — Ted R. Gropman & Christine Z. Fan - ConsensusDocs

Construction contracts often include a “no damage for delay” clause that denies a contractor the right to recover delay-related costs and limits the contractor’s remedy to an extension of time for noncontractor-caused delays to a project’s completion date. Depending on the nature of the delay and the jurisdiction where the project is located, the contractual prohibition against delay damages may well be enforceable. This article will explore whether an enforceable no-damage-for-delay clause is also a bar to recovery of “acceleration” damages, i.e., the costs incurred by the contractor in its attempt to overcome delays to the project’s completion date.

Courts are split as to whether damages for a contractor’s “acceleration” efforts are distinguishable from “delay” damages such that they may be recovered under an enforceable no-damage-for-delay clause. See, e.g., Siefford v. Hous. Auth. of Humboldt, 223 N.W.2d 816 (Neb. 1974) (disallowing the recovery of acceleration damages under a no-damage-for-delay clause); but see Watson Elec. Constr. Co. v. Winston-Salem, 109 N.C. App. 194 (1993) (allowing the recovery of acceleration damages despite a no-damage-for-delay clause). The scope and effect of a no-damage-for-delay clause depend on the specific laws of the jurisdiction and the factual circumstances involved.

There are a few ways for a contractor to circumvent an enforceable no-damage-for-delay clause to recover acceleration damages. First, the contractor may invoke one of the state’s enumerated exceptions to the enforceability of the clause. It is helpful to keep in mind that most jurisdictions strictly construe a no-damage-for-delay clause to limit its application. This means that, regardless of delay or acceleration, courts will nonetheless permit the contractor to recover damages if the delay is, for example, of a kind not contemplated by the parties, due to an unreasonable delay, or a result of the owner’s fraud, bad faith, gross negligence, active interference or abandonment of the contract. See Tricon Kent Co. v. Lafarge N. Am., Inc., 186 P.3d 155, 160 (Colo. App. 2008); United States Steel Corp. v. Mo. P. R. Co., 668 F.2d 435, 438 (8th Cir. 1982); Peter Kiewit Sons’ Co. v. Iowa S. Utils. Co., 355 F. Supp. 376, 396 (S.D. Iowa 1973).

Reprinted courtesy of Ted R. Gropman, Pepper Hamilton LLP and Christine Z. Fan, Pepper Hamilton LLP

Mr. Gropman may be contacted at gropmant@pepperlaw.com


Read the full story…
714.701.9180
CONSTRUCTION DEFECT NEWS
Red question mark amidst white question marks

Protect your construction claim rights.

When is a “Notice of Completion” on a California Private Works Construction Project Valid? Why Does It Matter for My Collection Rights?

Monday, January 27, 2020 — William L. Porter - Porter Law Group

What is a Notice of Completion?

A “notice of completion” is a document recorded by the owner of property where construction work was performed. Specifically, it is recorded at the Office of the County Recorder in the County where the work was performed. The notice of completion tells the world at large that the construction project is complete. It also triggers the deadlines for those who have not been paid to make their claims for payment.

Is an Owner of a California Private Works Project Required to Record a Notice of Completion?

No, there is no requirement that an owner of a California private works construction project record a Notice of Completion. However, there are consequences which depend on whether an Owner elects to record the notice or not.

For My Collection Rights, Why Does it Matter Whether a Notice of Completion Has Been Recorded?

The date of recording of a valid notice of completion sets the deadline for those who have not been paid for work performed and materials supplied to a California construction project to pursue such important collection remedies as the “mechanics lien”, the “stop payment notice” and the “payment bond claim.” These are very powerful collection remedies for those who have not been paid. If the deadline to pursue these remedies is missed by a claimant, then the claimant’s right to pursue these remedies is also missed. One of these remedies, the mechanics lien, will enable the claimant to sell the owner’s property where the work was performed in order to get paid.

Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, Porter Law Group

Mr. Porter may be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com

Read the full story…
Construction worker pinning something to uniform

Some on-site problems can be minimized with simple practices that every construction site should have in place.

Addressing Safety on the Construction Site

Monday, January 27, 2020 — Christopher G. Hill - Construction Law Musings

For this week’s Construction Law Musings Guest Post, we welcome a new face, Patrick Rafferty. Patrick (@ThePraff) is a consultant for Brahman Systems and has an interest in construction safety.

First of all, I’d like to say that I am not an attorney. Anything I say in this article should be taken with a grain of salt. All of the information that I have written in this article comes from personal work experience on the worksite.

Each year, construction sites around the nation see hundreds of thousands of injuries related to equipment operation and situations that could be avoidable with the right precautions in place. In 2011 alone, according to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, there were 4,069 workers killed on a construction site, most of which were avoidable. Though some sort of on-site problems are unavoidable, they can be minimized with simple practices that every construction site should have in place, whether it is the building of a high-rise building or a simple house renovation.

Here are some of the most common issues that lead to injuries on the construction site:

Lack of training

Before anyone steps onto a construction site, they need to have a thorough understanding of not only what they will be doing, but also how to use the equipment involved in the building process. All operators of heavy machinery should have verifiable training on the machine or equipment they will operate. Most equipment dealers offer training as part of their customer service, such as usage manuals, videos and quizzes. Once these are complete, many will offer a certificate of completion at the end of the process. The larger and more complex the machine, the more time should be allotted for training.

Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill

Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

Read the full story…
Businessman with arms folded

There is a risk of failing to carefully define accounting rules in a joint venture agreement.

Joint Venture Dispute Over Profits

Monday, January 27, 2020 — David R. Cook - AHC Construction and Procurement Blog

A recent Georgia Court of Appeals case demonstrates the risk of joint ventures failing to carefully define accounting rules in their joint venture agreement. Two trade contractors teamed up to accomplish certain tasks on a job at a wastewater lift station at Fort Gordon. A joint venture agreement provided for an equal split of the profits and losses. Unfortunately, the parties did not define “profit,” and particularly did not define what cost would be deducted in calculating profit. They disputed in particular whether certain large payments to individuals and 15% overhead charges should be deducted in calculating profits.

One party presented the expert testimony of an accountant while the other did not. The party presenting expert testimony asked the court to dismiss the other party’s claim because it was not supported by expert testimony of an accountant. The trial court granted the motion and dismissed the claim.

Reprinted courtesy of David R. Cook, Autry, Hall & Cook, LLP

Mr. Cook may be contacted at cook@ahclaw.com

Read the full story…

Pittsburgh Incremental House: A Home that can Grow with You | Kirsten Dirksen

714.701.9180
CONSTRUCTION DEFECT NEWS
Green leaves after rain

Exciting trends in LEED certification and green construction learned about during the recent Greenbuild International Conference and Expo.

Five LEED and Green Construction Trends to Watch in 2020

Monday, January 27, 2020 — Tommy Linstroth - Construction Executive

To succeed in any field, you can never stop learning—especially in the green construction industry where standards and technology are always growing and changing.

Here are a few of the exciting trends in LEED certification and green construction learned about during this year’s Greenbuild International Conference and Expo, which is the largest annual event for green building professionals in the world.

1. More Transparency About Products

In 2020, the product sustainability information provided by manufacturers will continue becoming more transparent and accessible. Manufacturers are coming to the table and presenting more useful information on environmental and health impacts, conducting life cycle analyses and making the information available for the design and construction marketplace.

Although this means even more information for construction and design teams to take into account when planning green construction projects, it’s a definite positive. We’re starting to see the actual environmental performance getting taken into account in product specification.

Reprinted courtesy of Tommy Linstroth, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved.



Read the full story…


Men and women partying in a home

Airbnb CEO announces a ban on party houses.

Airbnb Declares End to Party!

Monday, January 27, 2020 — Patrick J. Paul - Snell & Wilmer Real Estate Litigation Blog

As municipalities around the country evaluate changes to their respective codes in an effort to exert greater control over bad actors in the vacation rental market, Airbnb announced on November 2nd that it is banning party houses. The move comes in response to the shooting deaths of five people at a Halloween party hosted at an Airbnb rental house in Orinda, CA. CEO Brian Chesky announced on Twitter that starting November 2, Airbnb would ban “party houses” and redouble the company’s efforts to “combat unauthorized parties and get rid of abusive host and guest conduct.” twitter.com/bchesky

The four-bedroom rental reportedly had been rented on Airbnb by a woman who advised the owner her family members had asthma and needed to escape smoke from a wildfire burning in Sonoma County about 60 miles north of Orinda earlier in the week. Nevertheless, the homeowner was suspicious of a one-night rental on Halloween and reminded the renter that no parties were allowed. Having received complaints from neighbors and witnessing some party activity via his camera doorbell, the homeowner called police who were en route to the home, but arrived after the shooting. The Halloween party apparently was advertised on social media as an “Airbnb Mansion Party,” with an admission fee of $10 per person.

Independently owned vacation rentals are currently growing at a faster rate than hotels or motels, and in some instances are owned by out-of-state investors seeking not only a real estate return on investment, but also a return on investment associated with revenue streams generated by “pay to play” parties promoted on social media.

Reprinted courtesy of Patrick J. Paul, Snell & Wilmer

Mr. Paul may be contacted at ppaul@swlaw.com

Read the full story…


Construction equipment resting on desk

The top 10 stories dominating employment law in construction.

2019’s Biggest Labor and Employment Moves Affecting Construction

Monday, January 27, 2020 — Micah Dawson - Construction Executive

The construction industry is fueled by change, which is the only constant in life and construction. Still, continuous change makes compliance with state and federal laws and regulations more difficult.

While contractors may thrive on the frantic pace, sometimes it is good to look back and ensure they have an understanding of, and are complying with, the newest regulations and laws.

Top 10 Stories Dominating Employment Law in Construction

1. Trio of Federal Joint Employment Rules Expected in December 2019
Joint employment took center stage during the November 20, 2019 release of the Fall Regulatory Agenda, as three separate federal agencies announced plans to move forward with revised joint employment rules in December. While the Department of Labor and the National Labor Relations Board had already released versions of their draft rules, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission also announced that it would weigh in on the topic before the end of 2019. As of January 10, 2020, the EEOC had not done so.

2. NLRB Tightens Union Access to Employer Property
In a ruling that levels the labor relations playing field, the NLRB ruled that employers could rightfully eject outside union representatives soliciting petition signatures from a shared shopping center parking area. When read in conjunction with an earlier 2019 decision conferring greater rights to limit on-premises union activity by abolishing the “public space” exception, the NLRB has significantly restricted union access to private employer property.

Reprinted courtesy of Micah Dawson, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved.


Mr. Dawson may be contacted at mdawson@fisherphillips.com

Read the full story…


Construction workers on site

Situational awareness could help on-site employees finally reap the productivity benefits of digitalization.

The Need for Situational Awareness in Construction

Monday, January 27, 2020 — Aarni Heiskanen - AEC Business

Recent research backs up what we already know from practice: construction work is suboptimal. What happens on a construction site has not kept up with the demands of an increasingly complex work environment. Situational awareness could give on-site employees the necessary means to finally reap the productivity benefits of digitalization.

Under the guidance of Professor Olli Seppänen, research teams at the Finnish Aalto University have delved into everyday conditions at a construction site. With the workers’ permission, they used video cameras, sensors, and surveys to locate the bottlenecks in productivity. The researchers also monitored the movement of products and materials on a construction site. The results are eye-opening.

According to Aalto’s data, digitalization has not improved the productivity of construction foremen and workers. A typical worker still spends up to 70% of their time on activities that add no value: searching for information, unnecessary movement, and waiting. Construction materials are moved from place to place six times on the site before being consumed. In addition, especially on large construction sites, machinery often goes missing or is displaced.

Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business

Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

Read the full story…


Builders Standard of Care Expert Witness and Consulting General Contractor area area area

Builders Standard of Care Expert Witness and Consulting General Contractor area area area

Builders Standard of Care Expert Witness and Consulting General Contractor area area area

714.701.9180
714.701.9180
714.701.9180
Construction Defect Journal is aggregated from a variety of news sources, article submissions, contributors, and information from industry professionals.
No content on this site should be construed as legal advice or expert opinion. By viewing this site you agree to be bound by its terms and conditions CONSTRUCTION NEWS constructiondefecteminars.html constructionDefectChannel.html contactCDJ.html