Press enter to begin your search
 

What Owners Need To Know About Florida Statute §558.0035

Effective July 1, 2013, Florida Statutes Chapter 558 was amended to provide a “safe harbor” to individual design professionals for claims of negligence. Specifically, Florida Statutes §558.0035 states that any design professional “who is employed by a business entity or is an agent of a business entity is not individually liable for damages resulting from negligence occurring within the course and scope of a professional services contract.” Florida Statute §558.0035 also expands the definition of “design professionals” to include geologists in addition to architects, interior designers, landscape architects, engineers and surveyors. These changes are limited to individual design professionals only, not business entities, and the statute covers only economic damages. The new law does not limit claims for personal injury or property damage. It is also worth noting that §558.0035 will not limit professional negligence claims by parties who have no contract with an individual design professional and/or his or her...

Florida courts’ application of the “new” economic loss rule since Tiara Condominium Ass’n, Inc. v. Marsh & McLennan, Cos., Inc.

The Florida Supreme Court’s March 7, 2013 decision in Tiara Condominium Ass'n, Inc. v. Marsh & McLennan, Cos., Inc., 110 So. 3d 399 (Fla. 2013), limited application of the economic loss rule [a judicially created doctrine that sets forth the circumstances under which a tort claim is prohibited if the only damages suffered are economic losses] to product liability matters. So, how have Florida courts analyzed the application of the economic loss rule since this March 7, 2013 decision? In short, Florida courts appear to be allowing non-contractual claims, such as fraud, negligence, negligent misrepresentation, and breach of fiduciary duty to proceed, notwithstanding the existence of a contractual relationship. F.D.I.C. v. Floridian Title Group Inc., 2013 WL 5237362 (S.D.Fla. Sept. 17, 2013).(denying a defendant’s motion to dismiss breach of fiduciary duty and negligence claims based upon the economic loss rule and rejecting an argument that these claims were in reality inextricably intertwined...

Consequential Damages in Green Construction Lawsuits

By Mark J. Stempler

A primary concern in any lawsuit involving green construction is damages.  One party will claim it has been harmed and will typically demand money or specific performance.   There are different types of damages that can be sought including actual damages, future damages, punitive damages, and consequential damages.  That last category raises some unique issues in a green building lawsuit.
 
Consequential damages are typically defined in Florida as those that do not necessarily, but may directly or indirectly, result from the injury for which compensation is sought.  Consequential damages can include items like loss of use, lost profits, loss of rental income, etc.  These are all issues in the green building context too, but determining the value of these damages may be more difficult to define.  For example, suppose an owner is seeking green building certification for an apartment complex.  If the contractor or other professional responsible for attaining such certification does not get the certification, the owner may be entitled to consequential damages for lost rent for the units.  But, the owner could encounter difficulties in proving the amount of damages.  The owner likely believes that green buildings command higher rents than non-green buildings, but that is not guaranteed.  The burden will be on the owner to prove what that added value would have been.  Or, if the failure to achieve the green certification cause the owner to miss related tax credits or grants, the owner may have a claim for those values.  It will, of course, depend on what representations were made in the contract.  In fact, the loss of tax credits was the issue in one of the first reported green construction lawsuits.  In that case, which eventually settled, the contract contained a waiver of consequential damages.  Another potential scenario is when the project does not deliver the energy cost savings promised to the owner, or promised by an owner to a tenant for example.  Those lost savings may also provide a basis for a consequential damages claim.  These examples illustrate the need for clear and specific language in a construction contract regarding each parties’ representations, expectations and responsibilities.

Are You A Design-Build Firm?

Based upon weekly bid reports, the trend in Florida continues to emphasize design-build requests for proposals ("RFP") for public works projects. Public agencies view the design-build model as a means to streamline the procurement process as well as an opportunity to contract with one firm which has the responsibility for both the design and construction of a project....