Gray•Duffy Obtains Favorable Resolution through Settlement, Avoiding Extensive Discovery
December 2012
Overview
Michelle MacDonald of Gray•Duffy’s Encino office obtained a favorable resolution in a complex construction defect matter by reaching an early nominal settlement, avoiding potentially expensive and prolonged litigation.Discussion
Cohensedge v. Task Construction The case involved a custom 14,000-square-foot home built for the plaintiff by the general contractor defendant. Gray•Duffy’s subcontractor client was responsible for all of the electrical work in the home. The plaintiff asserted that there was water intrusion related to the installation of the conduit and junction boxes on the roof. The plaintiff also alleged numerous and diverse construction-related issues with the home, including water intrusion, efflorescent staining of the exterior stucco, unsealed roof penetrations and water proofing deficiencies. Shortly after the lawsuit was answered, the general contractor made a demand of $10,000 to Gray•Duffy’s client, whose subcontract agreement included indemnification and attorney’s fees provisions which were in favor of the general contractor and the plaintiff owner. Prior to the completion of discovery and the need to attend the deposition of any of the parties, Michelle MacDonald of Gray•Duffy negotiated a settlement of $2,500 for all issues, 25 percent of the amount originally sought.Please Note: This article is necessarily general in nature and is not a substitute for legal advice with respect to any particular case. Readers should consult with an attorney before taking any action affecting their interests.