Press enter to begin your search
mobile logo
 
Construction Law Authority / Litigation (Page 2)

Proposed Legislation to change Chapter 558

February 4, 2015
Sanjay Kurian
Construction Defects, Legislation, Litigation, Public Construction

The Legislature will be considering legislation this year to change Chapter 558, Florida Statutes.  Chapter 558 is  required process for any party seeking to pursue claims for construction defects.  The original goal of Chapter 558 was to provide an opportunity to settle defect claims without litigation or arbitration, and not to create another source of dispute or litigation.  This bill is contrary to that original intent. The proposed bill would create new rights and defeats any realistic hope to amicably resolve claims as more fully explained below.  These changes, if enacted, will negatively impact all owners of construction improvements including hospitals, doctor's offices, school buildings, condominiums, single family homes and commercial buildings.  The proposed legislation can be found here and the specific problems are noted below. Lines 66-76: Requiring the notice to specify the location of each alleged defect is impossible relative to any structure of any size.  To require a claimant...

Read More

What law applies to your Construction Contract – Simple or Not?

September 23, 2014
webmaster
Contracts, Litigation

You have a construction contract for work to be done on a project in Florida. Although hoping that all goes well, it’s your belief that if any legal issues arise, Florida law would apply. That may be correct, since Florida law would generally apply to issues concerning the performance of such a contract. However, that may not be correct. What if your construction contract has a choice of law provision that specifies the law of a state other than Florida applies? That will likely require a further analysis regarding issues that could include but are not necessarily limited to what legal, equitable, contractual, and tort-type matters are at issue, are those matters encompassed within the particular choice of law provision, are there procedural and substantive issues to be considered, will the enforcement of the choice of law provision violate Florida public policy, what do Florida’s choice of law rules indicate will...

Read More

Florida courts’ application of the “new” economic loss rule since Tiara Condominium Ass’n, Inc. v. Marsh & McLennan, Cos., Inc.

September 24, 2013
webmaster
Litigation

The Florida Supreme Court’s March 7, 2013 decision in Tiara Condominium Ass'n, Inc. v. Marsh & McLennan, Cos., Inc., 110 So. 3d 399 (Fla. 2013), limited application of the economic loss rule [a judicially created doctrine that sets forth the circumstances under which a tort claim is prohibited if the only damages suffered are economic losses] to product liability matters. So, how have Florida courts analyzed the application of the economic loss rule since this March 7, 2013 decision? In short, Florida courts appear to be allowing non-contractual claims, such as fraud, negligence, negligent misrepresentation, and breach of fiduciary duty to proceed, notwithstanding the existence of a contractual relationship. F.D.I.C. v. Floridian Title Group Inc., 2013 WL 5237362 (S.D.Fla. Sept. 17, 2013).(denying a defendant’s motion to dismiss breach of fiduciary duty and negligence claims based upon the economic loss rule and rejecting an argument that these claims were in reality inextricably intertwined...

Read More

Consequential Damages in Green Construction Lawsuits

September 23, 2013
Mark J. Stempler
Litigation

By Mark J. Stempler

A primary concern in any lawsuit involving green construction is damages.  One party will claim it has been harmed and will typically demand money or specific performance.   There are different types of damages that can be sought including actual damages, future damages, punitive damages, and consequential damages.  That last category raises some unique issues in a green building lawsuit.
 
Consequential damages are typically defined in Florida as those that do not necessarily, but may directly or indirectly, result from the injury for which compensation is sought.  Consequential damages can include items like loss of use, lost profits, loss of rental income, etc.  These are all issues in the green building context too, but determining the value of these damages may be more difficult to define.  For example, suppose an owner is seeking green building certification for an apartment complex.  If the contractor or other professional responsible for attaining such certification does not get the certification, the owner may be entitled to consequential damages for lost rent for the units.  But, the owner could encounter difficulties in proving the amount of damages.  The owner likely believes that green buildings command higher rents than non-green buildings, but that is not guaranteed.  The burden will be on the owner to prove what that added value would have been.  Or, if the failure to achieve the green certification cause the owner to miss related tax credits or grants, the owner may have a claim for those values.  It will, of course, depend on what representations were made in the contract.  In fact, the loss of tax credits was the issue in one of the first reported green construction lawsuits.  In that case, which eventually settled, the contract contained a waiver of consequential damages.  Another potential scenario is when the project does not deliver the energy cost savings promised to the owner, or promised by an owner to a tenant for example.  Those lost savings may also provide a basis for a consequential damages claim.  These examples illustrate the need for clear and specific language in a construction contract regarding each parties’ representations, expectations and responsibilities.
Continue reading

Florida adopts the Daubert standard for admissibility of expert testimony

July 31, 2013
webmaster
Litigation

Experts can play an integral role in construction disputes. At times construction litigation becomes a battle of the experts. Consequently, it is important to use an expert(s) that is not only well versed in his or her field, but an expert who is also able to provide admissible expert opinions in litigation. With the passage of House Bill 7015, effective July 1, 2013 and amendment of Florida Statute § 90.702 (Testimony by Experts), Florida has abolished the former Frye standard for the admissibility of expert testimony. See, Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C.Cir.1923), adopted by the Florida Supreme Court in Bundy v. State, 471 So.2d 9 (Fla.1985). The prior version of Florida Statute § 90.702 provided that: 90.702 Testimony by experts.—If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact in understanding the evidence or in determining a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by...

Read More

The Bonus Value of Your Liability Insurance Policy: Litigation Defense

April 9, 2013
Ryan Carpenter
Insurance, Litigation

Your liability policy's value goes beyond its coverage of losses up to its stated policy limit. Especially if you find yourself in a complex lawsuit with numerous parties, your policy could provide significant value by obligating your insurance company to pay your attorneys' fees and costs. Therefore, when faced with a potentially-covered claim, it is important to not only give notice to your liability carrier, but also request that your carrier defend you against the claim, to make sure you get the full value out of your policy....

Read More

Florida Supreme Court limits the economic loss rule to product liability matters – or not?

March 8, 2013
webmaster
Litigation

For the last eight (8) years, Florida’s economic loss rule has been applied to bar claims (1) where the parties are in contractual privity and one party seeks to recover damages in tort for matters arising out of the contract, or (2) where the defendant is a manufacturer or distributor of a defective product which damages itself but does not cause personal injury or damage to any other property. Indemnity Ins. Co. v. American Aviation, Inc., 891 So.2d 532 (Fla.2004). However, in its March 7, 2013 5-2 split decision in Tiara Condominium Ass'n, Inc. v. Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc., 38 Fla.L.W. S151A (Fla. March 7, 2013) the Florida Supreme Court has now receded from prior precedent and appears to have limited the application of the economic loss rule to product liability matters. The Court observed that the economic loss rule is a judicially created doctrine that sets forth the circumstances...

Read More

Can you recover punitive damages in construction cases?

December 12, 2012
webmaster
Litigation

A party seeking damages in construction litigation is often so incensed at the other side’s perceived outrageous conduct that they want to recover more than those compensatory damages that would make them whole. One potential item of additional recovery to consider is punitive damages. The purpose of awarding punitive damages under Florida law is not to further compensate the plaintiff, but to punish the defendant for its wrongful conduct and to deter similar future misconduct. The possibility of being subject to an award of punitive damages can be a significant impetus to resolve a dispute. But are punitive damages recoverable in every construction dispute? The answer is … it depends on the particular case. In Florida, breach of contract claims generally do not allow for the recovery of punitive damages. One seeking to foreclose a construction lien is likewise typically not entitled to recover punitive damages. However, where there is a finding of...

Read More