Desert Wind Partners, etc, et al. v. Johnson and Higgins
Published: Nov. 27, 1993 | Result Date: Nov. 4, 1993 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: 192825 – $5,000,000
Judge
Court
Riverside Superior Palm Springs
Attorneys
Plaintiff
John D. Rowell
(JDR Law Inc.)
Gary M. Paul
(Waters, Kraus & Paul)
Defendant
Facts
A wind park, consisting of 14 wind turbines, was built at Edom Hill (outside Palm Springs) by Capco Financial Services in late 1984. The wind turbines were owned by seven partnerships and individuals, including Desert Wind Partners II, a partnership; Liberty Wind Partners; Eagle Wind Partners; Coachella Wind Partners; Gilbert Nelson of Florida; William Watson of Florida; and Wind Power I. Approximately 100 limited partners participated in the purchase of the 14 wind turbines, which cost $250,000 to $350,000 each. Ampco, the U.S. licensee and distributor of the wind turbines, and Capco, the promoter of the partnerships, provided a performance warranty to the purchasers and obtained through Defendants insurance brokerage, Johnson & Higgins of California, a warranty insurance policy indemnifying Ampco and Capco for their obligations under the warranty. Defendant placed the warranty insurance with Northumberland General Insurance Company in September of 1984. Ampco and Capco certified the wind turbines under the warranty to be operational in December of 1984 and declared the wind turbines onto the policy in February of 1985. In April of 1985, Ampco and Capco made claims against the insurance policy, asserting defective design and sought the cost of repairs to the turbines and the loss of revenue that resulted while they were inoperable. The Northumberland Insurance Company was declared insolvent in July of 1985, and no claims were ever paid on the policy.
Settlement Discussions
Plaintiffs contend their demand was $1,500,000 and Defendants' offer was $300,000 prior to trial. Defendants contend their offer was $400,000 and Plaintiffs demanded $1,800,000.
Damages
Total investments of approximately $3,200,000 plus interest, legal costs, and loss of policy benefits. Plaintiffs claimed damages of over $9,000,000; Defendant claimed damages, if any, should be limited to $1,200,000.
Result
The jury returned a special Plaintiffs' verdict of $2,631,174 for negligence $2,631.174 for breach of fiduciary duties. Plaintiffs contend that the verdicts on each of these claims should be added together for a total verdict of $5,262,348; Defendant contends that such an award is duplicative and that the maximum verdict is $2,631,174 plus costs. The Court has scheduled a hearing for December 10, 1993, on this issue.
Deliberation
1 day
Poll
12-0 negligence and breach of fiduciary duty, 11-1 damages
Length
2 months
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390