Orly's latest poopies.....

Mikedunford · **Posted:** Tue Apr 17, 2012 2:19 pm

kimba wrote:

Sterngard Friegen wrote:

That was the first thing I noticed in a barebones pleading with few specifics but many quotations from the statute.

I figured they quoted all the parts of the house from the statute because the place is leaking so bad, they can't tell where it's all coming from, except since they didn't cite 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, they know it's not from the plumbing. It's odd because the roof construction, the windows/doors, the stucco, the tile are all different trades/ subs. You might have a roof that leaks because the apprentice on the job that day forgot to overlap the paper. Or a few windows/doors that leak because somebody forgot the caulk. Or the stucco leaks because they applied the sealer when the temp was too low. Or some tile that pop because they used bondera and didn't grout it right away. It's pretty unusual if everybody messed up.

The place probably just wasn't rated for the kind of sonic stress it's been subjected to.

AnitaMaria · **Joined:** Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:41 pm **Posts:** 2233

TexasFilly wrote:

When's Lev's answer due?

This was filed in Oct, so he filed an answer several months ago. His response was to file cross-complaints against a bunch of sub-contractors.

TexasFilly · **Joined:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:52 pm **Posts:** 10759

AnitaMaria wrote:

TexasFilly wrote:

When's Lev's answer due?

This was filed in Oct, so he filed an answer several months ago. His response was to file cross-complaints against a bunch of sub-contractors.

Can you tell from the docket who Lev's lawyer might be? ;;)

AnitaMaria · **Joined:** Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:41 pm **Posts:** 2233

There is an attorney listed among the case participants, but it's not clear who they are representing. Here is the list of participants:

AKME GLASS CROSS - DEFENDANT 12/23/2011
AMERICAN CUSTOM PLASTERING CROSS - DEFENDANT 12/23/2011
FALLBROOK ROOFING, CO. CROSS - DEFENDANT 12/23/2011
FRANCISCO ALVAREZ CROSS - DEFENDANT 12/23/2011
GGP, INC. CROSS - DEFENDANT 12/23/2011
HUGO'S CUSTOM SHEET METAL CROSS - DEFENDANT 12/23/2011
HUGO'S CUSTOM SHEET METAL CROSS - COMPLAINANT 04/13/2012
JEFFREY ALLEN BELTZ CROSS - DEFENDANT 02/23/2012
KAUFFMAN ENTERPRISES, INC CROSS - DEFENDANT 04/13/2012
LEV AMUSIN CROSS - DEFENDANT 04/13/2012
LEV AMUSIN DEFENDANT 10/27/2011
LEV AMUSIN'S CONSTRUCTION, INC. DEFENDANT 10/27/2011
LEV AMUSIN'S CONSTRUCTION, INC. CROSS - DEFENDANT 04/13/2012
MACRAE & EDRINGTON ATTORNEY 03/29/2012
OA CONSTRUCTION, INC CROSS - DEFENDANT 04/13/2012
ORLY TAITZ PLAINTIFF 10/27/2011
OSCAR ARBALLO CROSS - DEFENDANT 12/23/2011
QUALITY ASSURED CARPENTRY CROSS - DEFENDANT 12/23/2011
VISUAL CORTEX, INC. CROSS - DEFENDANT 02/23/2012
YOSEF TAITZ PLAINTIFF 10/27/2011

TollandRCR · **Posted:** Tue Apr 17, 2012 3:04 pm

There is no statement in the complaint that any of the required repairs have been made. There are two statements that plaintiffs have sustained and will sustain damages to correct, replace, and reconstruct the cited defects, plus expenses required for renting a substitute house and relocation to that house. The only mention of actions that have been taken is that the plaintiffs have hired experts and consultants to investigate the nature and extent of the defects.

If this were my house, with my belongings inside it and while living in it, I would have had most of the leaks repaired ages ago. It might be that the Taitzes are deferring maintenance until they receive a judgment, which raises questions.

TollandRCR · **Posted:** Tue Apr 17, 2012 3:11 pm

If Orly has found the right pitches for the materials in that house, a series of shrieks might have caused the tile to fall off the wall, vapor barriers to shatter, and roofing to disintegrate. Plus, it probably caused the door to shrink.

TexasFilly · **Joined:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:52 pm **Posts:** 10759

AnitaMaria wrote:

There is an attorney listed among the case participants, but it's not clear who they are representing.

Many thanks!

Chilidog · **Joined:** Mon Jan 09, 2012 12:36 pm **Posts:** 1997

A Legal Lohengrin wrote:

kimba wrote:

The place leaks like a sieve! :lol:

And the tile's coming off the walls also, too.

I hope they get black mold, too, the rotten bastards.

Now we are talking about my area of expertise.

If there are as many water leaks as they complaint seems to allege, then yes, there is a very strong probability that the house has mold issues. it all depends if the gypsum wallboard got wet and whether or not it was able to dry out properly.
As a rule, though, single family homes are less susceptible to mold that muti-family or commercial structures because of the different construction standards related to the fire rating of drywall partitions.

TollandRCR · **Posted:** Tue Apr 17, 2012 5:00 pm

Another thing that strikes me as odd is that the suit does not include the architect, yet it sues for negligent design. That may mean that the house was designed by a general contractor. This is often not a good idea.

ZekeB · **Posted:** Tue Apr 17, 2012 6:23 pm

TollandRCR wrote:

Another thing that strikes me as odd is that the suit does not include the architect, yet it sues for negligent design. That may mean that the house was designed by a general contractor. This is often not a good idea.

I've seen general contractors who have pre-designed house plans available. It's a way of cutting corners. I wouldn't expect this to be the case in such an upscale house. Once again, I have to wonder if a little "I'm a tightwad" attitude came into play when the final decisions were made.

borealis · **Posted:** Tue Apr 17, 2012 6:57 pm

Chilidog wrote:

A Legal Lohengrin wrote:

kimba wrote:

The place leaks like a sieve! :lol:

And the tile's coming off the walls also, too.

I hope they get black mold, too, the rotten bastards.

Now we are talking about my area of expertise.

If there are as many water leaks as they complaint seems to allege, then yes, there is a very strong probability that the house has mold issues. it all depends if the gypsum wallboard got wet and whether or not it was able to dry out properly.
As a rule, though, single family homes are less susceptible to mold that muti-family or commercial structures because of the different construction standards related to the fire rating of drywall partitions.

Interesting. I have seen a few homes in the Chicago area that required EIFS mitigation. My understanding is the product is not defective, but the problem is caused by improper installation and or improper building maintenance.
It is generally thought EIFS issues are found in states with very consistent and high levels of humidity. You won't see as much of this problem in single-family housing in the Midwest as you would in CA and the South. EIFS isn't used to build many houses in and around the Chicago area, but it is used for cheaper construction materials in strip malls, office buildings, hotels, condominium/apartment complexes.

Chili I hope I have this right.

Litlebritdifrnt2 · **Posted:** Tue Apr 17, 2012 7:14 pm

TollandRCR wrote:

There is no statement in the complaint that any of the required repairs have been made. There are two statements that plaintiffs have sustained and will sustain damages to correct, replace, and reconstruct the cited defects, plus expenses required for renting a substitute house and relocation to that house. The only mention of actions that have been taken is that the plaintiffs have hired experts and consultants to investigate the nature and extent of the defects.

If this were my house, with my belongings inside it and while living in it, I would have had most of the leaks repaired ages ago. It might be that the Taitzes are deferring maintenance until they receive a judgment, which raises questions.

In my neck of the legal woods it is known as "failure to mitigate damages"

TollandRCR · **Posted:** Tue Apr 17, 2012 8:35 pm

ZekeB wrote:

TollandRCR wrote:

Another thing that strikes me as odd is that the suit does not include the architect, yet it sues for negligent design. That may mean that the house was designed by a general contractor. This is often not a good idea.

I've seen general contractors who have pre-designed house plans available. It's a way of cutting corners. I wouldn't expect this to be the case in such an upscale house. Once again, I have to wonder if a little "I'm a tightwad" attitude came into play when the final decisions were made.

The Taitzes may have gotten exactly what they paid for.

Sequoia32 · **Posted:** Tue Apr 17, 2012 8:40 pm

TollandRCR wrote:

The Taitzes may have gotten exactly what they paid for.

That's my bet.

Paul Pieniezny · **Posted:** Tue Apr 17, 2012 8:47 pm

ZorbasLeGreque wrote:

Offtopic :

1. This is incredibly vague. Where are the facts ? In a German court this would be dismissed even if the defendants would chose the empty chair defense.

2. This is something contractual. Can you really sue a subcontractor, someone with whom you do not have a contract. ?

Offtopic :

1. Vague. You can say that again. Overhere, the Taitzes would have to appoint their own architect, who would find out what his colleague (even a general contractor needs an architect overhere) overlooked so many years ago. You need to act quickly, since after ten years the original architect (and possibly his crew) are no longer liable, except under exceptional circumstances (proven wilfull, secret defects, that sort of thing). Of course, in court the new architect would only be a major witness, the judge would appoint an expert who together with the expert appointed by the plaintiff and by the defendant, would decide on the relative responsibility of all parties.

A multi-party suit like this involving all subcontractors would be difficult to arrange overhere, which is why (see 2) you seem to believe the Taitzes also filed against the subcontractors (of course, when you know the reason for the problem, it is easier to sue the contractor and the relevant subcontractor only).

I am not sure, but the Taitzes wanting to do it on the cheap may never have consulted a house building expert. Delaying introducing an expert into the process until the contractor has sued all subcontractors as he promised or threatened to do - hoping that this way, the costs of the expert might be shared out among all the parties? Could be it - we know our Orly that way.

2. Er, I think Lev hired those subcontractors. Under responsabilite civique, it would not make a difference anyway, you are liable for all damages caused to another person whether your act causing them was conscious or not, educated or not. I think that would actually be the way to proceed for the Taitzes and for the contractor since the house was probably built more than ten years ago, so the architect would be off the hook (unless you can prove wilfullness and hidden effects).

I see one of the subcontractors is down as a complainant as well. Trying to shift the blame on another subcontractor already? Or just sending it back up the ladder to Lev, claiming he is responsible for something "funny" they did, blaming what they did on one of his "suggestions"?

Of course, knowing the Taitzes, they could have delayed the case by first contacting Lev (he is probably a fellow Russian anyway) and let him look at what may be wrong, then when he could not find it, they talked to the one subcontractor who is now also complaining, and after being convinced by him that Lev is responsible for the bad design, they sue Lev. Luckily for them, realizing that time is not on their side, they take a real lawyer.

OK, done speculating. And my two cents as a foreigner has been spent. Wisely?

borealis · **Posted:** Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:38 pm

Subcontractors get sued all the time in the US and I think must be named if a property owner sues the GC. Also subcontractors can legally place a lien against someone's property if the owner doesn't pay them. They simply go to a county courthouse and file the lien with the Recorder's office. I always make mine sign a release of lien when I pay. Otherwise a disreputable contractor can really screw up your property sale before closing.

Sometimes subcontractors file liens against innocent homeowners. If the GC collects payment from a homeowner and fails to pay the subcontractors, the subs can legally file a lien against unsuspecting owners' property. This happens more frequently than it should especially in areas where new home developers go belly up taking the homeowners money and leaving the subs to pursue further remedies against the owner. Owners are left with unfinished homes and lost money compounded with potential for liens.

Anyone care to add or correct, feel free. IANAL so I welcome help.

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:56 pm

Construction defect litigation is very complicated in California. The general and specialty contractors normally sue all subcontractors that may also be liable to bring their insurance into play. This appears to be a run-of-the-mill construction defect case, except that the Chaleria is involved. I also think there may be another complication being overlooked since the property is apparently in a common interest development, but I'd rather not mention it without knowing more. (And I have no interest to know any more.)

raicha · **Posted:** Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:57 pm

Sterngard Friegen wrote:

Construction defect litigation is very complicated in California. The general and specialty contractors normally sue all subcontractors that may also be liable to bring their insurance into play. This appears to be a run-of-the-mill construction defect case, except that the Chaleria is involved. I also think there may be another complication being overlooked since the property is apparently in a common interest development, but I'd rather not mention it without knowing more. (And I have no interest to know any more.)

Then we have no common interest to know any more.

neonzx · **Joined:** Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:27 am **Posts:** 4221

Quote:

Internal Server Error. Please contact a server administrator.

Looks like Orly's server went

again.

Somerset · **Posted:** Wed Apr 18, 2012 4:36 am

It's back to "normal"

neonzx · **Joined:** Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:27 am **Posts:** 4221

Somerset wrote:

It's back to "normal"

Indeed. And Orly's burning the 1:30am oil.

:twisted:

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=38931 :twisted:

Quote:

Help needed in research

Posted on | April 18, 2012 | No Comments

I got an e-mail that yet another case is in discovery: a case of Michael Voeltz in FLorida, however I did not see an answer in that case being filed by the defense.

The case is not in discovery until the answer is filed or until there is an order by the judge denying a motion to dismiss. Can someone check, if an answer was filed in that case? If it was indeed filed, can someone please, forward it to me, I wanted to compare it to the answer filed by the Secretary of State and the Democratic party of MS in my case in MS.

Also, there were 2 cases filed by attorney Irion on behalf of several plaintiffs. It was filed half a year ago in TX and TN. It was announced as a class action law suit. I did not see an answer there. Was an answer filed by the defendants in those 2 cases, or was it only a motion to dismiss? If an answer as filed, can someone forward it to me? Was there an order by the judge granting that case a class action status, I never saw that order either.

Welsh Dragon · **Posted:** Wed Apr 18, 2012 6:41 am

The email about the Florida refers to a statement from Larry Klayman, ORYR has it up in it's entirity:

Quote:

Attorney Larry Klayman's Statement on Florida
Ballot Challenge Filed Against Barack Obama
Via Email
Statement by Larry Klayman, Esq. on Florida Ballot Challenge

Snip

Currently, the case has been filed, amended once, and is now in discovery. We anticipate interrogatories, fending off a motion to dismiss, and a hearing, with witnesses, evidence. We intend to rectify the injustice inflicted upon registered Democrat plaintiff Michael Voeltz in having an ineligible candidate fraudulently talk his way onto the ballot of the great state of Florida. In doing so, we will also benefit millions and millions of other citizens of Florida and our beloved nation. In the event we should not succeed in that mission, we will still succeed in exposing the crimes of AKA Barack Hussein Obama and his enablers, rendering re-election an impossibility, something the Republicans have so far been unable—or unwilling—to do.

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2012/04/attorney-larry-klaymans-statement-on.html

neonzx · **Joined:** Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:27 am **Posts:** 4221

Quote:

Bad Request (Invalid Hostname)

Chilidog · **Joined:** Mon Jan 09, 2012 12:36 pm **Posts:** 1997

Chito dropped the intertubes again and broke it.

Or
even her own malware hates her.

P.K. · **Posted:** Wed Apr 18, 2012 12:21 pm

Sterngard Friegen wrote:

Construction defect litigation is very complicated in California. The general and specialty contractors normally sue all subcontractors that may also be liable to bring their insurance into play. This appears to be a run-of-the-mill construction defect case, except that the Chaleria is involved. I also think there may be another complication being overlooked since the property is apparently in a common interest development, but I'd rather not mention it without knowing more. (And I have no interest to know any more.)

The very first law firm I worked for (as a long-term temp) did primarily construction defect defense. All those cross-complainants and cross-defendants made me very cross indeed. Every other field of law I have worked in since then has been easy-peasy in comparison.

Falsehoods unchallenged only fester and grow.

Orly's latest poopies.....

Who is online