*
Hello Everyone.
I just stumbled on this while searching at http://www.lawyersweekly.com .
While it is no surprise that contractors are under what sometimes seems to be constant attacks, it does surprise me the extent that these particular people went in their attack against this subcontractor.
Hope this helps.
alan joseph samson
[email protected]
http://www.crosswinds.net/~informapauperis
I Want Justice! Webring
Opinion Digest
Real Property
Residential Sale – Defect – Inspection – Liability Of Subcontractor
Where (1) buyers purchased a home overlooking a ravine after agreeing to accept certain defects and after having the home inspected, (2) after the purchase, the buyers hired a contractor, who brought his own subcontractor architect, to ask about building a cathedral ceiling in the home and to find out whether the deck needed to be replaced, (3) the contractor and subcontractor answered the questions about the two remodeling projects and (4) the buyers later discovered a large foundation crack that indicated that the entire house was sliding into the ravine, we find that the subcontractor was not asked about structural defects and that he was not in privity of contract with the buyers.
As such, the subcontractor has no liability to the buyers for their economic damages and the trial court correctly granted summary judgment to the subcontractor on this claim.
We find that there may be other scenarios in which the subcontractor, although not in privity, may be liable for economic losses. These include damages to a foreseeable plaintiff, such as these home buyers, with whom a defendant has a strong nexus. However, in this case, the subcontractor was not hired to review anything other than the remodeling projects, and so we reject the buyers’ arguments on this point.
The buyers’ eight other assignments of error are also overruled.
Affirmed.
Schoedinger, et al. v. Hess, et al. (Lawyers Weekly No. 110-207-00) (24 pages) (Tyack, J.) Appealed from the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas. Timothy E. Miller and Joanne S. Peters for the buyers; Bridgette Roman for the sellers; Jeffrey W. Hutson, Alvin E. Mathews Jr. and Mary Barley-McBride for the subcontractor; Tom McCash for the contractor; Roger L. Schantz, Mark D. Tucker and Lyle B. Brown for defendant King Thompson, Holzer-Wollam, Inc. (No. 99AP-1254) (June 8, 2000).
© 2000 Lawyers Weekly Inc., All Rights Reserved.
http://www.lawyersweekly.com/signup/archives.cfm?page=http://207.79.145.14/archives/oh/00/61900138.htm
Replies
*
Awful! Note that lawyers don't sue people, people sue people. :) And there are jerks everywhere. That they appealed this judgment, let alone filed the claim, surprises me, unless there are other facts or law i just don't know. It would be useful to read the entire opinion ....
I take it the homeowners lost out on suing the sellers...
Pretty nerdy contractor, reading Lawyer's Weekly, hee-hee. Have others read about the lawyer who conceded sabotaging his death row client's appeal because he "wanted him to die"? See the link.
*Hi andrew d.Pretty nerdy that you were the first to respond! hee-hee.What link? I would like to read that story! What link?Besides, that is the type of story that is what the I Want Justice! Webring is all about. Find link near bottom of page at http://www.crosswinds.net/~informapauperis .Hope this helps.alan joseph [email protected]://www.crosswinds.net/~informapauperisI Want Justice! WebringLegalRemedies Forum
*the link = lawyer's weekly, they carried the story ... i read about it in a blurb in the Post ... corruption in death cases is disturbingly commonWhere's the "I Don't Want Justice!" forum?
*Lawyer Admits to Sabotaging AppealRich Beckman
*Hi Rich Beckman.Thank you for the link. It is very interesting.alan joseph [email protected]://www.crosswinds.net/~informapauperis
*
Hello Everyone.
I just stumbled on this while searching at http://www.lawyersweekly.com .
While it is no surprise that contractors are under what sometimes seems to be constant attacks, it does surprise me the extent that these particular people went in their attack against this subcontractor.
Hope this helps.
alan joseph samson
[email protected]
http://www.crosswinds.net/~informapauperis
I Want Justice! Webring
Opinion Digest
Real Property
Residential Sale – Defect – Inspection – Liability Of Subcontractor
Where (1) buyers purchased a home overlooking a ravine after agreeing to accept certain defects and after having the home inspected, (2) after the purchase, the buyers hired a contractor, who brought his own subcontractor architect, to ask about building a cathedral ceiling in the home and to find out whether the deck needed to be replaced, (3) the contractor and subcontractor answered the questions about the two remodeling projects and (4) the buyers later discovered a large foundation crack that indicated that the entire house was sliding into the ravine, we find that the subcontractor was not asked about structural defects and that he was not in privity of contract with the buyers.
As such, the subcontractor has no liability to the buyers for their economic damages and the trial court correctly granted summary judgment to the subcontractor on this claim.
We find that there may be other scenarios in which the subcontractor, although not in privity, may be liable for economic losses. These include damages to a foreseeable plaintiff, such as these home buyers, with whom a defendant has a strong nexus. However, in this case, the subcontractor was not hired to review anything other than the remodeling projects, and so we reject the buyers' arguments on this point.
The buyers' eight other assignments of error are also overruled.
Affirmed.
Schoedinger, et al. v. Hess, et al. (Lawyers Weekly No. 110-207-00) (24 pages) (Tyack, J.) Appealed from the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas. Timothy E. Miller and Joanne S. Peters for the buyers; Bridgette Roman for the sellers; Jeffrey W. Hutson, Alvin E. Mathews Jr. and Mary Barley-McBride for the subcontractor; Tom McCash for the contractor; Roger L. Schantz, Mark D. Tucker and Lyle B. Brown for defendant King Thompson, Holzer-Wollam, Inc. (No. 99AP-1254) (June 8, 2000).
© 2000 Lawyers Weekly Inc., All Rights Reserved.
http://www.lawyersweekly.com/signup/archives.cfm?page=http://207.79.145.14/archives/oh/00/61900138.htm