Advertising Disclosure Email Disclosure

Architectural, Engineering and Construction Defect Litigation

The Architectural, Engineering and Construction Defect Litigation Practice Group of Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin clearly understands the relationship between construction professionals and their respective responsibilities. Our practice group has a considerable number of years of experience in defending construction industry cases. The practice includes representation of owners, developers, general contractors, construction managers, subcontractors and design professionals. This group quickly develops an understanding of the project and contract documents in order to identify key issues early, then proceeds to develop those issues into sound defense strategies. Our practice group's litigation experience includes initial negotiations, construction claims, arbitration proceedings and jury trials involving all phases of construction litigation.
 
Our defense approach is aimed at the early identification of key issues and is predicated on developing the earliest possible defense strategies tailored to the individual case and client. The application of this strategy is carried out by a team approach consisting of experienced partners, associates and paralegals capable of handling the basic, as well as the highly sophisticated and complex, construction litigation matters.
 
The Architectural, Engineering and Construction Defect Litigation Practice Group of Marshall Dennehey consists of a diverse group of professionals with considerable experience handling matters throughout Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, Ohio, West Virginia, Florida and New York. The group prides itself on its multi-jurisdictional range of experience and substantial number of cases handled.
 
We look forward to your inquiries and remain at your disposal for presentations or seminars which your company may desire.

Pages

Sep 1, 2012
We successfully defended an architect and his firm against allegations of professional negligence claimed by the plaintiff - a developer/owner of a $7 million commercial project our client helped design. The plaintiff was initially seeking damages...
Feb 1, 2012
After extensive briefing and argument, we successfully obtained dismissal of a professional negligence case against an architectural/engineering firm. The plaintiff failed to serve an Affidavit of Merit, and we moved to dismiss under N.J.S.A. 2A:53:...
Jan 2, 2012
We successfully obtained a no cause from the jury in a very complex medical malpractice/wrongful death/construction/engineering malpractice case tried for 45 days. Plaintiff's demand had been $20 million. The theory of the case was that our...
Oct 17, 2011
Attorney successfully argued a motion for summary judgment in favor of our client, an architectural firm. Plaintiff alleged that our client's breach of the standard of care led to plaintiff's tripping and falling on a ramp at a construction site....
Aug 18, 2011
Attorney obtained summary judgment on behalf of a civil engineer in a claim involving flooded residential properties for which the builder claimed the site of storm water management plans were defective. The attorney demonstrated that the builder's...
Aug 18, 2011
Attorney obtained summary judgment on behalf of an architect in a claim involving a restaurant employee who sustained serious burns in an accident involving kitchen equipment. The attorney demonstrated that the architect's scope of services for the...
Jan 12, 2011
Attorney obtained summary judgment on behalf of the architect for an airport construction project.  The summary judgment was on two counts of a three count action alleging design errors.  Dismissal was subsequently obtained as to the third count,...
Jul 19, 2010
Attorney obtained summary judgment on behalf of a structural engineering firm that had prepared plans and specifications on a large condominium project. The complaint alleged multiple defects, primarily related to the roof, windows and building...
May 17, 2010
Attorney obtained a dismissal on the pleadings of plaintiff's Complaint wherein it was alleged that plaintiff suffered damages arising from the construction of a barn, by plaintiff's neighbor, on a farm downhill and across the street from plaintiff'...
Oct 26, 2009
Attorney obtained a dismissal of a wrongful death action filed against an engineering firm performing construction engineering inspections on an Interstate roadway project for a state’s Department of Transportation. Citing the state’s statutory law...

Pages

Pages

Law Alerts January 1, 2012
An architectural firm entered into an oral contract for services to help determine the feasibility of a project. The architectural firm entered into a second oral contract for behind-the-scenes assistance to the owner for planning and zoning. The..., Case Law Alert, 1st Qtr 2012
Law Alerts January 1, 2012
The Appellate Division reversed a trial court’s decision to not impose personal liability on the owner of a residential construction company under the Consumer Fraud Act. In imposing personal liability, the court found that the owner..., Case Law Alert, 1st Qtr 2012
Law Alerts January 1, 2012
The New Jersey Supreme Court further clarified when an individual owner or employee of a company may be liable under the Consumer Fraud Act (“CFA”). In Allen, the Court first held that it was “clear” that an individual who..., Case Law Alert, 1st Qtr 2012
Law Alerts January 1, 2012
A developer transferred ownership of a condominium association (“CA”) while construction continued. Construction activities caused a fire and damages to the CA, which its insurer paid. The insurer filed a subrogation claim against the..., Case Law Alert, 1st Qtr 2012
Law Alerts January 1, 2012
The court dismissed a homeowner's suit after the homeowner initially filed a warranty claim. While the homeowner never proceeded to the available arbitration process under the New Jersey New Home Warranty and Builders’ Registration Act,..., Case Law Alert, 1st Qtr 2012
Articles December 1, 2011
Construction Today, December 2011
Defense Digest Article September 1, 2011
Florida - Construction Litigation , Key Points: Statutes of repose, unlike statutes of limitations, impose even more stringent and concrete time limitations for a claimant to bring a cause of action against the defendant. A claimant's right to bring a cause of action..., Defense Digest, Vol. 17, No. 3, September 2011
Law Alerts July 1, 2011
The plaintiff condominium association sued the defendant subcontractors, alleging their work on the condominium project was defective and asserting claims of negligence, strict liability and willful and wanton disregard for human safety. The trial..., Case Law Alert - 3rd Qtr 2011
Law Alerts July 1, 2011
The owner sued the architect for negligent design and oversight on a project. The architect brought the contractor into the case on a third party claim, alleging the "construction defects" were due to the contractor's negligence. Experts for the..., Case Law Alert - 3rd Qtr 2011
Law Alerts July 1, 2011
The Pennsylvania State Registration Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists ordered this professional to pay a civil penalty for "practicing geology" pursuant to §4(e) (63 P.S. §151(e)) of the..., Case Law Alert - 3rd Qtr 2011

Pages

Chair

John H. Osorio
Chair, Architectural, Engineering and Construction Defect Litigation Practice Group
(856) 414-6007
jhosorio@mdwcg.com

Additional Contacts

Michael J. DeCandio
Senior Counsel
(904) 358-4203
mjdecandio@mdwcg.com

Related Practice Areas

Before you send this email please note:

You are attempting to send email, through a link on our website, to an attorney of Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin or an employee in our firm. Please note that your email may not be treated as confidential and does not create an attorney-client relationship. You should not rely upon the transmission of an email through this website if you are seeking to enter into such a relationship. Until such time as we have agreed to represent you, no information in your email will be treated as confidential. Please contact us directly by telephone at 1.800.220.3308 if it is your intent to seek legal counsel with our firm or convey confidential information.

If it is still your intent to send this email, knowing that it may not be treated as confidential, you may accept our terms of agreement by pressing "OK". If you choose not to accept these terms of agreement you may navigate away from this page by pressing "Cancel."