Robertson & Vick - Tennis Villas at Monarch Beach HOA vs. D.T. Smith, Inc.

CASE NO.: 69 51 84
SETTLEMENT DATE: May 9, 1995
CASE TYPE: Defective Construction
RESULT : $5.175 million global settlement
COURT : Orange County Superior Court, Santa Ana
JUDGE: Francisco F. Firmat
SUMMARY: Extensive construction defects alleged in condo project; $6.5 million in damages
PLAINTIFF ATTORNEY: Kasdan, Simonds, et al., By: Kenneth S. Kasdan and David G. Epstein, Irvine
PLAINTIFF ATTORNEY: DiCaro, Highman, et al., By: Kim Brown, Irvine for CrossComplainant, Monarch Beach Tennis Villas
DEFENDANT DEVELOPER ATTORNEY: Knopfler and Robertson , By: Kevin Davis, Universal City for D.T. Smith; Sims, Cozad, et al., By: William D. Morrow and Carter Mudge, Newport Beach for D.T. Smith

Facts

FThis action involved alleged construction defects and deficiencies in Phases III & IV of a condominium project. These phases consisted of 92 units in 23 twostory, fourunit structures. The construction on these phases of the project began in 1988 and was completed in 1990. Certificates of occupancy were issued beginning in 1988 and ending in 1990. Unit prices ranged from $250,000 to over $300,000.

Plaintiff

That defendant developer was strictly liable for the construction defects and deficiencies at the project; that the subcontractor and design professional defendants were negligent in their design and construction of the "luxury" project.

Damages

Plaintiff claimed $6.5 million to repair: Shear wall defects; inadequately constructed seismic ties and holddowns; inadequate framing; inadequate foundation footing depth and size; lack of or inadequate firestops; improper fire protection of recessed can lights; stairway defects; water intrusion; stucco defects; improper flashing; defective and corroded plumbing; improper seismic plumbing restraints; improper waste and vent piping; improper construction of air conditioning condensate drainlines; exhaust ducts which improperly terminate; inadequate soil preparation and compacting; inadequate roadway design and installation; excessive sound transmission between dwelling units; improper construction of the roof; improper installation of electrical wiring and circuits.

Defendant

While acknowledging certain defects, contended that the defects were not as serious as Plaintiff claimed and contended they could be repaired for less than Plaintiff's demand. Defendant project designer disputed that there were any design defects and contended that Plaintiff's alleged damages were solely caused by the developer's failure to construct the project in accordance with the plans and specifications.

Demand

$6.5 million, per Plaintiff. Defendant counsel Carter Mudge disputes this figure, and says the original demand was $12,987,739

Notes

The Honorable Jerrold S. Oliver (Ret.) of JAMS/ENDISPUTE was appointed as Mediator and Discovery Referee in this case. Plaintiff Counsel Kasdan notes that a previous lawsuit involving Phases I & II was settled several years ago.