Practice,
Made Perfect

The Mississippi office recently obtained summary judgment, achieving complete dismissal for their client. The Plaintiff sued a local county, the Mississippi Department of Transportation, and a construction contractor, arguing repair work done on a stretch of highway in rural Mississippi caused oil build-up on the road and led to Plaintiff’s single-vehicle accident. TWPD lawyers successfully argued the Plaintiff lacked sufficient evidence to proceed with his case. The Court dismissed all claims against TWPD’s client. 

‍

The Mississippi office of TWPD obtained summary judgment in a lawsuit filed against a local church in Starkville, MS. The lawsuit was filed in Oktibbeha County Circuit Court. The Plaintiffs claimed that the church’s construction of new buildings and a parking lot caused stress on the City of Starkville’s drainage system which caused flooding of their residence on numerous occasions. TWPD’s summary judgment was based on the Plaintiffs’ filing suit outside of the applicable statute of limitations for this type of claim and arguments against the claim being a continuing tort or allow able under the discovery rule.

A general contractor subcontracted with the firm’s client, S&S Sprinkler, to retrofit an existing sprinkler system in an old grocery store that was being remodeled into a Club 4 Fitness facility. After the project was completed, a leak occurred in the building causing significant damage. The cost to remedy the damage caused by the leak exceeded $500,000.  The general contractor alleged that S&S Sprinkler’s workmanship caused the leak and resulting damages, and filed in federal court seeking those damages, plus costs and attorney’s fees. At trial, our client proved that the leak originated in an area of the building where it had never performed work.  There was also evidence that the leak originated from other factors, such as aging pipes, weather events and water pressure problems.  The jury sided with our client, dismissing the suit with prejudice, thus allowing our client to seek reimbursement of all costs and attorney fees.

‍

Louisiana’s Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed judgment in favor of the firm’s client, a general liability insurer, in an insurance coverage dispute. The insured roofing contractor was sued after a fire started during a roof repair and caused damage to multiple buildings. The general liability policy at issue was subject to an endorsement that excluded coverage for damage caused during a “torch down” roofing operation. The trial court rejected the roofer’s claim that the exclusion was unambiguous and/or inapplicable and granted summary judgment. On appeal, the ruling was affirmed. The court held that, under a plain reading of the exclusion, “damages caused by the use of hot tools to perform roofing repairs, triggers the Torch Down Roofing Exclusion, and precludes coverage.”

‍