This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Construction
Negligence
Single Family Residence

Rick and Karen Gentillali, et al. v. Perris 125, Ltd., et al.

Published: Jun. 14, 1997 | Result Date: May 6, 1997 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 250206 c/w 261096 Verdict –  $354,000

Judge

Charles D. Field

Court

Riverside Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Lawrence T. Osuch


Defendant

Richard J. Elliott

John M. Goodspeed

Robert W. Skripko Jr.
(Law Office of Robert W. Skripko Jr. PC)

David H. Pierce
(David H. Pierce & Associates PC)


Experts

Plaintiff

Salar Dehbozorgi
(technical)

James R. Libby
(technical)

Don Whiteman
(technical)

Jeffrey Garth
(technical)

David D. Jackson
(technical)

Defendant

Jeffrey A. Johnson
(technical)

Seb J. Ficcadenti
(technical)

Bert W. Howe
(technical)

John Coil
(technical)

Michael J. Miller
(technical)

Rick Allgire
(technical)

Edward A. Grochowiak
(technical)

Facts

In 1989, defendant Van Daele Development, a developer and general contractor, built two tracts of homes totaling 144 residences in Perris. Defendant Tri Corps Engineering Inc. was the rough grading subcontractor hired by defendant Van Daele Development for the project. Defendant Tri County Framers Inc. was the rough framing subcontractor hired by Van Daele Development for the project. The plaintiffs, 24 homeowners who purchased homes in the tracts, complained of numerous design or construction defects in their residences, including cracked slabs, inadequate foundations and alleged defects in the design and construction of the rough framing members which, they argued, would not withstand a significant seismic event. The plaintiffs brought this action against the developer/general contractor based on strict liability, negligent misrepresentation and breach of implied warranty theories of recovery. The defendant cross-complianed against the framer and the grader

Settlement Discussions

The settlement discussions were not disclosed.

Damages

The plaintiffs claimed $1,829,816.33 in damages for cost of repair and loss of property value.

Other Information

The verdict was reached approximately seven years after the case was filed.

Deliberation

3½ days

Length

21 days


#83476

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390