I agree with everything you said. Question is, how bad will homeowners be
hit by this case. It will be interesting to read the blow by blow details.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roger Turk [mailto:73527.1356(--nospam--at)compuserve.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2001 9:55 PM
> To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> Subject: RE: Aas ruling
> You provided valuable information about the Aas case:
> . > The Superior court in pre-trial agreed to exclude the list of
> . > defects and known building code violations.
> A jury can only consider that which is presented to them, and if actual
> structural defects and known building code violations are not
> presented to
> them, then they cannot make a decision in this regard.
> If the HOA's attorney agreed to exclude these items, or did not
> object to excluding them, then the result of the trial is
> predetermined as is
> the outcome of any appeal based on the defects.
> What the engineering profession and owners with construction
> defects need is
> lawyers who are also engineers, who have a good understanding of
> and the law. The hardest part of any investigation is educating
> the lawyer
> if the investigation leads to litigation. The worst results are when the
> lawyer thinks that he/she knows everything, and only talks to the
> expert a week before the trial.
> Many years ago, when I started doing investigations, there was a
> lawyer with
> a large law firm who I think had an engineering education. His firm
> typically represented insurance companies in defense of the
> policy holder and
> on more than one occasion, he and I were opposite of one another. During
> depositions, he had the technique of asking the engineering expert to
> "explain that in a simple manner so that this dumb lawyer can understand
> it." He was always cordial in his examination of witnesses and
> was a true
> gentleman attorney. I had respect for him, and I believe that he
> had respect
> for me as he referred several people to me.
> A. Roger Turk, P.E.(Structural)
> Tucson, Arizona