>
Results: Construction Law
Vera Townhomes Homeowners' Association v. Vera Townhomes
$1.5 million
In a construction defect case, Klein & Wilson represented a homeowners' association consisting of 48 condominium units. The developers and contractors denied there were construction defects and refused to pay anything. After conducting a "show-and-tell" presentation of the defects at the project and inviting all the defendants to destructive testing, the defendants recognized they would be found liable and paid Klein & Wilson's client approximately $1.5 million.
Wesley v. Kifton
$500,000
In this construction defect case, Mr. Wilson sued some of the largest developers in California, including Jack Nicklaus (the golfer) and Watt Industries. Mr. Wilson's clients purchased a large residential lot on a Jack Nicklaus golf course and, soon after the purchase, the lot was destroyed by a flood. All the defendants denied liability, and Mr. Nicklaus even threatened Mr. Wilson with a malicious prosecution action. After Mr. Wilson presented compelling evidence that the lot was defective, the defendants settled by paying approximately $500,000.
Doe Corporation v. Roe Corporation (Case Confidential)
$475,000
Klein & Wilson's client hired a structural engineering firm to design several commercial buildings. Years after the buildings were constructed, a piece of concrete broke off one of the concrete panels. Investigation revealed the structural engineer made calculation errors, resulting in inadequate chord connections. At mediation, Klein & Wilson recovered all of the client's damages, including attorneys' fees and prejudgment interest.
Breton v. Midland TME
$250,000
In a construction dispute, Mr. Klein represented a construction company for collection of its contract account and foreclosure of a mechanic's lien. The defendants alleged construction defect and a variety of other defenses, including some issues never before considered by a California court. Mr. Klein recovered over $250,000 for the construction company and won the right for his client to foreclose on its mechanic's lien.
Masonry Mechanics v. Breton Construction
$200,000
Mr. Wilson represented Breton Construction in this construction defect and breach of contract action. Masonry Mechanics sued Breton Construction for several hundred thousand dollars for nonpayment of its work. Mr. Wilson proved that Breton Construction refused to pay for the work because it was defective. Moreover, Mr. Wilson proved that Masonry Mechanics caused Breton Construction to suffer approximately $200,000 in delay damages. At arbitration, the court awarded Masonry Mechanics nothing and awarded Mr. Wilson's client approximately $200,000.
Valdez v. Rico
$90,000
In 2003, Klein & Wilson won a summary judgment in a mechanic's lien case, recovering $90,000 for their client. Klein & Wilson also persuaded the court to order defendants' property sold to satisfy the judgment.
Siegel v. Dyer
(Settlement)
Plaintiff sued Klein & Wilson's client, alleging she failed to disclose fungus when she sold her property to plaintiff. The case was troubling because the parties signed an amendment to the agreement in which the client disclosed the fungus, plaintiff agreed to take responsibility for it, and plaintiff received a credit for the condition. Due to this fact, Klein & Wilson filed a cross-complaint alleging plaintiff was breaching the terms of the contract. On the eve of the hearing on a motion for summary judgment Klein & Wilson filed, plaintiff agreed to pay Klein & Wilson's client $60,000 for having to defend a frivolous lawsuit.
Ambassador Hotel Co., Ltd. v. Wei-Chuan Investments
(Settlement)
Klein & Wilson was retained only after the client suffered a judgment approaching $70 million. Following reversal of the trial court's ruling, Klein & Wilson was able to have the judgment reduced by tens of millions of dollars.
Doe Corporation v. Roe Corporation (Case Confidential)
(Settlement)
Plaintiff sued Klein & Wilson's client, a general contractor, for $12 million alleging that a 225,000 square foot concrete slab was installed defectively. Klein & Wilson tendered the defense of the case to the client's carrier who rejected the tender. Klein & Wilson threatened to file a bad faith claim against its client's insurance carrier. While Klein & Wilson was negotiating with the insurance carrier, it conducted discovery and proved, through expert testimony and scientific evidence, that the concrete slab was not defective and needed no repairs. Klein & Wilson resolved the case at mediation with its client paying nothing and the plaintiff receiving a nominal amount from the client's insurance carrier.
