Home Sick: More ways to deal with Chinese drywall
Going after the builder is likely to yield quicker results and allow homeowners to remove Chinese drywall or relocate.
July 31, 2009 at 08:00 PM
5 minute read
So far, litigation relating to the Chinese drywall allegations has focused on the foreign manufacturers of the drywall–not necessarily the most effective way for homeowners to benefit quickly in order to repair their homes or relocate, lawyer Scott Wolf says in “Drywall Drama” (August 2009).
“Homeowners aren't doing anything wrong necessarily about going after the manufacturers,” Wolf says. “But from practical application standards, is the homeowner going to benefit quickly and completely by joining a class action against foreign manufacturers, or would the homeowner benefit by filing against the builder?”
Going after the builder, he says, is more likely to yield quick results and allow homeowners to remove the drywall or relocate. Many homeowners are turning their attention to homebuilders.
In March, Lennar Corp., one of the country's largest homebuilders, was served with its first class action relating the drywall. In a July 10 SEC filing, the company says it is currently dealing with 41 state lawsuits in Florida as well as two federal class actions relating to defective drywall allegations. Lennar also revealed in the filing that it built around 400 homes in Florida using Chinese drywall, mostly in 2006 and 2007.
Despite the lack of science on the drywall, Lennar has taken a proactive approach to dealing with it. In January it launched a program to relocate residents in some Florida homes so the company can replace the drywall and any items the drywall may have damaged. It covers all associated costs. It is also arranging monitoring services for other homes believed to contain the drywall. In the meantime, it continues to pursue the Chinese manufacturer of the drywall, Knauf Plasterboard Tianjin Co. Ltd. of China (a unit of The Knauf Group, based in Germany).
Taking the initiative to replace the drywall is a departure from some homeowners' horror stories of builders ignoring drywall complaints. It's also a smart move from the risk mitigation perspective, an area that Wolf has been mulling over lately.
“If they're living there and the cause of their health problems is their prolonged exposure, then there's going to be an interesting argument that maybe the people who were living in the drywall didn't mitigate their losses by tearing this drywall out or moving out,” he says. “At the same time, if the losses continue to get worse, who has the duty to come in and stop and prevent this drywall from continuing to decay this building? Where does liability start and stop because someone doesn't mitigate the losses?”
So far, litigation relating to the Chinese drywall allegations has focused on the foreign manufacturers of the drywall–not necessarily the most effective way for homeowners to benefit quickly in order to repair their homes or relocate, lawyer Scott Wolf says in “Drywall Drama” (August 2009).
“Homeowners aren't doing anything wrong necessarily about going after the manufacturers,” Wolf says. “But from practical application standards, is the homeowner going to benefit quickly and completely by joining a class action against foreign manufacturers, or would the homeowner benefit by filing against the builder?”
Going after the builder, he says, is more likely to yield quick results and allow homeowners to remove the drywall or relocate. Many homeowners are turning their attention to homebuilders.
In March, Lennar Corp., one of the country's largest homebuilders, was served with its first class action relating the drywall. In a July 10 SEC filing, the company says it is currently dealing with 41 state lawsuits in Florida as well as two federal class actions relating to defective drywall allegations. Lennar also revealed in the filing that it built around 400 homes in Florida using Chinese drywall, mostly in 2006 and 2007.
Despite the lack of science on the drywall, Lennar has taken a proactive approach to dealing with it. In January it launched a program to relocate residents in some Florida homes so the company can replace the drywall and any items the drywall may have damaged. It covers all associated costs. It is also arranging monitoring services for other homes believed to contain the drywall. In the meantime, it continues to pursue the Chinese manufacturer of the drywall, Knauf Plasterboard Tianjin Co. Ltd. of China (a unit of The Knauf Group, based in Germany).
Taking the initiative to replace the drywall is a departure from some homeowners' horror stories of builders ignoring drywall complaints. It's also a smart move from the risk mitigation perspective, an area that Wolf has been mulling over lately.
“If they're living there and the cause of their health problems is their prolonged exposure, then there's going to be an interesting argument that maybe the people who were living in the drywall didn't mitigate their losses by tearing this drywall out or moving out,” he says. “At the same time, if the losses continue to get worse, who has the duty to come in and stop and prevent this drywall from continuing to decay this building? Where does liability start and stop because someone doesn't mitigate the losses?”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLululemon Faces Legal Fire Over Its DEI Program After Bias Complaints Surface
3 minute readOld Laws, New Tricks: Lawyers Using Patchwork of Creative Legal Theories to Target New Tech
Lawsuit Against Amazon Could Reshape E-Commerce Landscape
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250