A former home builder in El Cajon sued the developer of the condo complex he built after the home builder discovered that there were potentially defective lamps in the building. The lamps were in a high risk of failing, but the home builder did not warn the developer. He did not replace the defective lamps with new ones. Instead, he allowed them to leak and burn down. When the owner of the complex became ill as a result of the leaking light, the home builder’s insurance company dropped the case.
After the owner of the complex died in a car crash, the attorney who represented the home builder lost the lawsuit.
Yet, another attorney representing the same company did not end the lawsuit. Instead, he and his firm tried to get the state to allow his firm to sue the owner of the complex for damages because of the “general peril” clause found in the state’s consumer protection statutes. That law allows lawsuits to be filed against those who are exposed to “unfair and unforeseen harm or damage.”
The home builder lawsuit named the home builders’ insured party, John Mansfield, and the other named parties, namely, Trane, LG, and Daimler-Chrysler.
Trane and LG had signed a master warranty agreement with Mansfield stating that they would pay all claims made by the home builders. Yet, the attorney for Trane claimed that the home builders had “indirectly” caused the accident. In addition, the Mansfield family was exposed to a laundry list of hazards during their building experience.
Another home builder lawsuit involves the death of an infant who became trapped in a hot stroller.
An employee of Trane was cleaning out a storage facility when the stroller became overheated and fell off of the seat. Another person working on the site also fell and suffered a similar injury. While some in the construction crew reported that they saw the infant fall, Trane’s lawyer said that there was no way of telling if the baby was moving. The company did not have adequate insurance to cover potential injuries to employees.
The home builder lawsuits against Trane also named the well-known attorney, John Mansfield, as a defendant.
Mansfield is currently under a litigation suit for his role in the death of the infant. The lawsuit says that Mansfield failed to make reasonable judgments regarding the safety of the home builders. Trane’s attorneys argue that they had warned Mansfield of potential dangers and that he did nothing to correct the problems. Trane is currently owed a $2.75 million settlement over the incident.
Perhaps the most telling part of the home builder lawsuit is that it names not only Tranes but the well-known electrical subcontractors Lasko and Kohler as well.
These companies were specifically named as a result of a letter from Trane’s general contractor stating that all subcontractors were required to pay for any work that they did and that they would be held financially responsible for any accidents that their employees might cause. The lawsuit says that the general contractor was aware of one case where an electric shock to a subcontractor killed a woman. While the general contractor was not directly responsible for her death, he was responsible for failing to provide his employees with appropriate training on dealing with dangerous work environments.
