Confidential
Settlement – $880,000Judge
Court
L.A. Superior Santa Monica
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Timothy M. Howett
(Law Offices of Timothy M. Howett)
Defendant
Edith R. Matthai
(JAMS)
Experts
Plaintiff
Herbert Katz Jr.
(technical)
Donald Waller
(technical)
Gerald Lehmer
(technical)
Leonard Evans
(technical)
John J. Nicholas
(technical)
Ralph E. Phillips
(technical)
Defendant
James K. Watson
(technical)
Raymond C. Alcaraz
(technical)
Benjamin Tunnell
(technical)
Donald R. Hughes
(technical)
Dennis A. Evans
(technical)
Valentine S. Hoy
(technical)
Henry A. Ojendyk
(technical)
Daniel S. Daderian
(technical)
Facts
Between 1984 and 1986, the defendant developer/general contractor designed and constructed a 20-unit condominium project in West Los Angeles. The defendant developer sold the homes to the plaintiffs in 1986 and 1987. The plaintiff homeowners association gained control from the defendant developer in December 1987 and thereafter became aware of defects in construction of the semi-subterranean parking garage structure, framing, floors, stucco, roof, skylights, sheet metal, plumbing system, electrical system, and other aspects of the building's design and construction. The plaintiff homeowners association brought this action against the defendant developer based on negligence, strict liability, breach of express and implied warranty and negligent misrepresentation theories of recovery.
Settlement Discussions
There were no settlement demands or offers made prior to the mediation.
Damages
The plaintiff sought $3.4 million in cost of repair damages and $1.5 million in relocation damages.
Other Information
The settlement was reached approximately six years after the case was filed. The reported settlement was reached between the plaintiff, the defendant and five cross-defendants through a mediation held May 24, 1996 before David Jenkins. In addition, the defendants and three of the cross-defendants assigned to the plaintiff their indemnity rights and cross-complaints against the non-settling party (the cross-defendant structural engineer) and against the non-served cross-defendants. The action remains pending as against those parties. The two defendant corporations who comprised the developer of this project were both dissolved in 1988. The defendants had only one insurance policy with limits of $1 million. The defendants' insurance carrier defended under a reservation of rights, but filed a declaratory relief action during the pendency of the construction defect action, which was stayed until the conclusion of the action. The insurance coverage action then ascended to the appellate court on a Writ of Mandate. In indicating its intent to overturn the stay, the appellate court also questioned whether there was insurance coverage for the defendants under the policy. The construction defect action and the insurance coverage action were settled simultaneously.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390