Remember 9-16-06? Here is an interesting lawsuit.

[Bill Doms]

Another chaser from MN sent me this link regarding the family of the victim of the 9-16-06 Rogers, MN tornado suing the homebuilder. I has heard rumors last summer this might happen and according to the story below, the trial will begin Monday.

http://www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=535071

Are there any precedent cases like this? Tim M??

[Steve Miller TX]

I think the intersting aspect of this case will revolve around this snippet from the story:

The Wendt's attorney says he will introduce expert testimony suggesting straight line winds, not a tornado, managed to rip the home off its foundation. The National Weather Service rated the weather event an F2 tornado.

Why would it being a tornado or straight line winds make a difference in the construction standard being the alleged cause? I am quite curious to know the legal reasoning behind that. Perhaps straight line winds aren't considered as "damaging" or "destructive" as a tornado therefore laying more blame on the alleged construction deficiency?

I'm also curious to know who the "expert" witness is. I mean, trying to dispute an official NWS evaluation is going to be very very tough.

Indeed, if there are no precedents for this, I'm certain we'll see more litigation along these lines in the future.

[JF Massicotte]

Maybe a little off-topic, but someday someone will sue SUV owners after his house is destroyed by a Hurricane...

[rdale]

Maybe a little off-topic, but someday someone will sue SUV owners after his house is destroyed by a Hurricane...

You'll need to translate that one again - how are SUV's are hurricanes related?

[Adam Lucio]

I believe it was a reference to the crackpots who believe people who drive large guzzlers are contributing to global warming and thus, more and stronger hurricanes :rolleyes:

On topic: Thats pretty sad...the economy is in bad enough shape without more ridiculous lawsuits. If this proves successful i can see this starting a nasty trend that will eventually cause even more economic headache. When will people learn...

[rdale]

On topic: Thats pretty sad...the economy is in bad enough shape without more ridiculous lawsuits.

If their house was built to less than coded standards, and less than the people were told it was built to, wouldn't that be a lawsuit-able offense?

[Andrew Herron]

Here's the kicker I think...

"Plaintiff attorneys also say the home the Wendts were in was the only one in the neighborhood to blow off its foundation and was the only home in the neighborhood built by Monarch Homes."

Based on that, I'd probably sue too.

[JF Massicotte]

Here's the kicker I think...

"Plaintiff attorneys also say the home the Wendts were in was the only one in the neighborhood to blow off its foundation and was the only home in the neighborhood built by Monarch Homes."

Based on that, I'd probably sue too.


Still it doesn't say wether or not the contractor respected the code... I can see how a tornado can damage only one home in a neighborhood... All you need is badluck...

[JF Massicotte]

If their house was built to less than coded standards, and less than the people were told it was built to, wouldn't that be a lawsuit-able offense?

100% agree on that one, but why introduce expert testimony about straight line wind vs tornado winds instead of expert testimony desmonstration about how the home was poorly built disrespectfully of the code?

[shane turner]

I am not exactly how they build homes but I think had the house been more tied down with anchor bolts etc. it probably would not have sustained as much damage. I remember this event but do not remember a house being wiped clean off its foundation. Maybe they should get more structural engineers involved when construction companies who bulid homes so they will not try to cut corners. It may prevent things like this from happening in the future.

[Adam Lucio]

If their house was built to less than coded standards, and less than the people were told it was built to, wouldn't that be a lawsuit-able offense?

I agree and if its blatently obvious that the house was built way under code, then they have a valid case...but then people are going to hear about this and such lawsuits will be abused...I guess well see what details end up coming out.

[Shane Adams]

Most houses are built under code. It's called "time" and "money". I figure anyone who's got the mental strength and patience to sue would win.

After all, it's a person's unwillingness to deal with the mental aspect of a dragged out lawsuit that lawyers and companies thrive on to screw people over. All you need to do is just take the plunge and sue (if your case is valid).

Too many people go the "I just didn't want the hassle" route...and that's why companies and lawyers get away with it. The same thing that kills people in severe weather is what allows people to be taken advantage of: human complacency.

[Daniel Christianson]

I agree with shane, if you look at how fast houses are built these days, what are the chances that the house is built by code and safe, anchoring wise, its sad to lose someone theres alot you can blame, if there is proof this house was built under code , and i mean visual proof then i can see going to sue, but i also agree on the bad luck part as well... while not likely, it does happen unfourtanetly. Mother nature is going to do what she is going to do there is no stopping it.

[Dennis Dennison]

[QUOTE=Steve Miller TX;207842]I think the intersting aspect of this case will revolve around this snippet from the story:


Why would it being a tornado or straight line winds make a difference in the construction standard being the alleged cause? I am quite curious to know the legal reasoning behind that. Perhaps straight line winds aren't considered as "damaging" or "destructive" as a tornado therefore laying more blame on the alleged construction deficiency?


there would be a difference of a wind blowing "supposedly" from one direction, where a tornado has winds that twist.

I saw a great video of a small tornado in Europe, crossed a road in front of minivan, and hit a tree in the field next to the car--the tree disappeared, but it was NOT suck up--it was twisted and snapped-then sucked up.

But i am sure we all know this--I think this is just another JERK who is lawsuit happy and willing to PUSH IT and see what happens.

[rdale]

But i am sure we all know this--I think this is just another JERK who is lawsuit happy

Her 10-yr old daughter was killed, possibly due to faulty construction. Calling her a "jerk" is probably not the response I'd expect to see on ST...

[Craig Schultz]

If poor construction is the reason for the lawsuit, then a co-defendant should be the city (specifically the building inspectors). They have to sign off on the construction, starting with the floor plans and ending with the issuing of the Certificate of Occupancy.

I agree that the anchoring of houses is an issue, but not the builder's fault. If you want all homes anchored, you need to work on changing the building code. But keep in mind, every law or code you add to construction will only drive up the cost.

[Danny Neal]

I want to start off by saying I am sad someone lost their life. I remember this story from when it happened, and didn't it even prompt a senator to call out the NWS for lack of warning?

So they are saying that the poor construction was due to bolting in the garage or am I missing something? Did they not have a basement? If you watch the video provided in the link above, they said she was killed rushing to a NEIGHBORS home. Yes it is a sad event, but faulty construction aside.....why not huddle in an interior closet or a basement or bathtub instead of flee. Even with the lack of warning, if you can hear or see conditions deteriorating outdoors, why risk it and run outside anyway? I am not sure construction caused a wrongful death more than lack of knowledge of what to do in that situation.A trial will begin Monday in a wrongful death suit filed against Monarch Homes. Brooks Builders, and Consolidated Concrete and Masonry are also named as 3rd party defendants.

[rdale]

http://stormtrack.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10044

Every news report I've seen with Google says that the girl died when her home "collapsed"

[Danny Neal]

Yes, but would she have died if she was in a proper shelter and not fleeing to a "neighbors house" ?

[Danny Neal]

Actually it is odd...... in the article it says

All four people in the home were on their way to the basement when the tornado lifted the home off its foundation and crushed Jaymi, lawyers for the plaintiff say.

BUT at the 1:20 - 1:25 mark of the video it says "10 year old Jaymi Wendt was killed when she tried to rush down to the basement of a NEIGHBORS HOME" so either the media has its' facts screwed up or they were really fleeing to a neighbors home which could damage their case.

[Rob Satkus]

Here's a link to the NWS assessment of the event if you haven't seen it before..

http://www.weather.gov/os/assessments/pdfs/RogersAssessment.pdf

RS

[Bill Doms]

Her 10-yr old daughter was killed, possibly due to faulty construction. Calling her a "jerk" is probably not the response I'd expect to see on ST...

Not often I'll agree with Rob but he is dead one with this. Being a little presumptuous there Dennis without having the facts. Spend some time on Google in regards to what went on after the Rogers event and I think you'll rethink your calloused response.

Actually it is odd...... in the article it says
BUT at the 1:20 - 1:25 mark of the video it says "10 year old Jaymi Wendt was killed when she tried to rush down to the basement of a NEIGHBORS HOME" so either the media has its' facts screwed up or they were really fleeing to a neighbors home which could damage their case.

She and her brother were babysitting at the neighbors...which ended up being the structure in question.

After talking with the some people who may end up be subpoenaed for testimony, there evidently is no precedent case for something like this. I intend on attending the closing arguments when that time comes. Even with a likely lengthy appeals process in the the event the court rules in favor of the plaintiff, I can about imagine the floodgate which could open. If nothing else, it may force builders to tighten up the QC on their craftsmanship?

[Brad Nelson]

If you've ever heard Tim Marshall speak about what he's found after a tornado rips apart a neighborhood, this lawsuit is certainly viable. In my opinion, construction companies need to be held accountable for cutting corners to save time and money. Even building a house to "code" is not good enough because just building it to code is the lowest standard that you can build a house to.

I'd like to see hurricane clips on roofs be mandatory in new construction but I doubt that will ever happen.

[Danny Neal]

Not often I'll agree with Rob but he is dead one with this. Being a little presumptuous there Dennis without having the facts. Spend some time on Google in regards to what went on after the Rogers event and I think you'll rethink your calloused response.



She and her brother were babysitting at the neighbors...which ended up being the structure in question.

After talking with the some people who may end up be subpoenaed for testimony, there evidently is no precedent case for something like this. I intend on attending the closing arguments when that time comes. Even with a likely lengthy appeals process in the the event the court rules in favor of the plaintiff, I can about imagine the floodgate which could open. If nothing else, it may force builders to tighten up the QC on their craftsmanship?

Ahhhh okay. Now I understand..... and I just re-read the article and it did say that as well :rolleyes: DUH! So it is Jaymi's family that is suing alone? Or is the homeowner of that house also in on the lawsuit. I wonder if the homeowner of the destroyed house will also open up a suit if they found that construction was shotty....

[John Robinson]

Indeed, if there are no precedents for this, I'm certain we'll see more litigation along these lines in the future.

Actually, I do know of a similar case from years back in my area, although it fortunately did not involve loss of life.

A structure was damaged by a tornado and the insurance company refused to pay, saying the construction was substandard. The mess sat there unrepaired for years, as a result.

A local TV meteorologist was hired by the owners of the property. The lawsuit went on for quite some time, and unfortunately, I don't know what the outcome was. The meteorologist has since moved on.

At the time of the tornado, I don't believe the area involved was within any city's boundaries, so the building code would have been only very basic.

[Dennis Dennison]

Her 10-yr old daughter was killed, possibly due to faulty construction. Calling her a "jerk" is probably not the response I'd expect to see on ST...


Next time I post, I will be certain to run it by you for your approval.

In any event, I feel no reason to defend my words.

[Danny Neal]

There was no warning for the tornado so how could they have known to go to the basement beforehand? I originally thought they heard the weather getting bad and ran to a neighbors house for shelter but that was not the case..... I don't think 2 teenage kids babysitting two infants at a neighbors house are going to want to SEE the tornado or have a camcorder to record it.

EDIT: Message still stands even though he changed his.....

[Dennis Dennison]

Well I doubt the home builder should be sued-It is silly--a lawsuit against the national Weather service might be in order as they categorized it as a EF1-2, which is inconsistent with the level of damage caused.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/95/245759126_785f80810c.jpg?v=0


The house was obviously hit by something stronger,and the weather service didnt issue a warning till it had happened. This I am sure is in part to the weather service not wanting to issue a warning as far too many that are reports sound the sirens and when nothing happens people get complacent.

STILL, it says they were trying to get to a neighbors basement--that means they were outside-or on the way out. I wasn't there It really doesn't matter to me, but I gave my response. What is next? When will people start to sue because the wind messed up their hair? Or for blown in garage doors?

People are just lawsuit happy, if this was 20 years ago, there would be no lawsuit.

[Danny Neal]

STILL, it says they were trying to get to a neighbors basement--that means they were outside-or on the way out. I wasn't there It really doesn't matter to me, but I gave my response.

Again.....they were BABYSITTING at the neighbors house. I, at first, thought they were at their own home and ran to the neighbors when they noticed the weather getting bad. Turns out they were next door babysitting the neighbors kid which is why I got confused in my previous responses.

[Dennis Dennison]

Ah, Well Danny I have no problems with you at all.:)

But in ANY event, to run from one house to another given the voracity of the storm was a stupid thing to do , and led to the death. For had they stayed put, they might not have been injured at all.

And given they were trying to go form one structure to another, who would they be suing had say a car been blown out of a collapsed garage and landed on the kid? Again fact is they should NOT have been running from one place to another. I know how cold and harsh that sounds, but its the facts. Had it been a 45 year old man--would there still be a lawsuit? Maybe the 19 year old babysitter should be sued for not maintaining control over the younger children?

[Danny Neal]

Ah, Well Danny I have no problems with you at all.:)

But in ANY event, to run from one house to another given the voracity of the storm was a stupid thing to do , and led to the death. For had they stayed put, they might not have been injured at all.

And given they were trying to go form one structure to another, who would they be suing had say a car been blown out of a collapsed garage and landed on the kid? Again fact is they should NOT have been running from one place to another. I know how cold and harsh that sounds, but its the facts. Had it been a 45 year old man--would there still be a lawsuit? Maybe the 19 year old babysitter should be sued for not maintaining control over the younger children?

No problem, Dennis. I didn't want to come off as condescending or anything. I am as confused with this whole situation as you are. I am not sure they were running from any house. I thought they did. After re-reading the article and the video in the article it seems that they were permanently at the neighbors house that night. May not have been aware of the severe weather approaching.......saw the weather getting horrible outside, got scared and tried to run to the basement or closet. At that moment, maybe the tornado hit and it was wrong place at the wrong time. I know NWS didn't issue a warning until afterwards, but the assessment posted above said the quickest time to issue the warning would have been a couple minutes AFTER the tornado developed.

I am still baffled on how the lawsuit is going to work. The mom of the daughter sues the contractors. If she wins.....does that open the door for the actual owner of the house to sue the contractor for sub-standard construction?

[rdale]

Next time I post, I will be certain to run it by you for your approval.

In any event, I feel no reason to defend my words.

I don't need to approve your messages, and you don't need to defend your words. A child was killed, possibly due to illegal construction methods, and you call the grieving mother a "jerk." That stands on its own merit.

Well I doubt the home builder should be sued-It is silly--a lawsuit against the national Weather service might be in order as they categorized it as a EF1-2, which is inconsistent with the level of damage caused.

You can't sue the NWS on the basis of their EF-scale rating.

This I am sure is in part to the weather service not wanting to issue a warning as far too many that are reports sound the sirens and when nothing happens people get complacent.Not at all - if you read the report, you get an idea of why no warning was issued.

STILL, it says they were trying to get to a neighbors basement--that means they were outside-or on the way out.Read it again - nowhere does it say they were outside or heading outside.

This was an interesting case with the GR2AE's implementation of the NSSL rotation algorithm -- it did a great job on picking up this storm well before touchdown.

[rdale]

From the Minneapolis Star:

At issue are anchor bolts embedded in concrete blocks -- bolts that might not have been spaced closely enough together or deep enough to firmly secure the base of the house's walls, said Sauter, of the Minneapolis law firm Bassford Remele.



"The property was not constructed ... in compliance with applicable building laws, codes, ordinances, regulations or in accordance with industry standards," the suit says.



[...]


Jaymi Wendt had accompanied her brother Jake, then 19, who was asked by neighbors Jeff and Beth Heibel to babysit the Heibels' two young children, according to the lawsuit. When the storm hit, Jake ushered the children to the basement, Sauter said.


Jaymi was leading the way when her world went black and the house began to collapse, Sauter said. The sheer weight of the upper floor caused it to collapse into the basement, he said.

"It was like a wedding cake, with the top floor, intact, falling," Sauter said. "Now the family wants accountability."

[shane turner]

It is unfortunate that a 10 year-old was killed form this tornado. But from what I can tell the damage to the house looks like it was consistent with what it was rated. It looks like the enitre house was shifted off its foundation which is a DOD 5 for a single family home with a windspeed of around 121mph would put it in the EF2 category. The upper bound would put it into the lower end of EF3 and the lower bound would put it into the EF1 category. I know there are homes that are build very shoddy cleaning the house off its foundation and disintegrating the remains making it appear to be EF4-EF5 level damage when in reality it only amounted to about EF2 damage. The NWS was right on when they rated this house an F2 on the old fujita scale. I would think that this house would have had to have been of somewhat decent for them to even rate this an F2. Unless this house was supposed to be built of the most superior type of construction I dont know if there could be a lawsuit. I do feel bad for the mother who lost her 10 year-old daughter but the damage looks consistent with what the NWS rated it.

[rdale]

It looks like the enitre house was shifted off its foundation which is a DOD 5 for a single family home with a windspeed of around 121mph would put it in the EF2 category.

That DOD however represents a well-built home to industry standards... If the bolts holding it down weren't legal, then the DOD no longer applies as damage could occur with lesser winds. And that can't be determined from a picture.

[Dennis Dennison]

I retract any statements made on this as they were based on partial information. Now I read Anchor bolts in concrete block--At least where i live, its not done that way. Concrete blocks simply cannot hold anchor bolts even if filled with concrete. Additionally, you say the upper floor collapsed into the basement...so was it a two story house?

I will make no further comments as its obvious none of us have all the full details.

However I do not think a lawsuit will be won, UNLESS the anchor bolt issue was to blame.

[Tim Marshall]

Bill Doms writes: Are there any precedent cases like this? Tim M??
Brad Nelson wrote: If you've ever heard Tim Marshall speak about what he's found after a tornado rips apart a neighborhood, this lawsuit is certainly viable.
REPLY: I am unable to comment on this matter at the present time until the case has been resolved. I have been retained by the Wendt's. TM

[Tim Marshall]

OK. The case just settled, so now I can talk about it. This house was the only one in the neighborhood that was pushed off its foundation and collapsed killing ten year old Jaymi Wendt during the Rogers, MN tornado. Close examination revealed anchor bolts were not imbedded deep enough into the concrete masonry foundation, so they were standing too tall to properly secure the nuts and washers. Other anchor bolts were missing nuts and washers needed to secure the sill plates. So, the house was not anchored well to its foundation IMO. The house was pushed to the north and collapsed on its walk out basement. The second story remained with vinyl siding, soffits, and roof shingles still intact. The garage doors were pushed inward and were lying on top of the vehicles that had been parked in the garage. The air conditioner and wood porch deck remained nearby. The roof of the garage flew off to the northeast and came to rest upright with shingles and roof vents still attached.

Defendants, which included the builder, argued that since a tornado struck the home, it was an act of God, and therefore no one but God should be held liable. Such cases involving acts of God are not rare and I have been involved in them, ever since my first case with Hurricane Allen back in 1980. Boy, am I getting old.

TIM M.

[Steve Miller TX]

The case was settled out of court confidentially. Details:

http://www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=536365&catid=14

Thanks for sharing some of the specifics, Tim. It certainly sounds like some potent evidence against the defendents.

I'm still curious as to the initial article mentioning that the Wendts were trying to argue straight-line winds instead of a tornado. Aren't both "acts of God" and thereby a moot point? I'm trying to understand their argument.

In any event, I hope that this ripples through the industry to help promote/encourage better building standards. Sadly, I'm sure it will take several more lawsuits like this and needless deaths to make any impact.

[Tim Marshall]

Steve wrote: I'm still curious as to the initial article mentioning that the Wendts were trying to argue straight-line winds instead of a tornado. Aren't both "acts of God" and thereby a moot point? I'm trying to understand their argument.

REPLY: Yes, before I got involved, the plaintiff attorney thought that straight-line winds pushed the house off its foundation, since the home was pushed straight back and not twisted. However, I indicated that a house sees a straight wind at a given instant -even in a tornado. Since the home failed in an instant - the damage appeared straight-lined.

Also, my detailed damage survey of the neighborhood revealed there was a rotating wind field present. A few objects were pushed over to the west and south (i.e. wood fences, a light pole, etc). This case illustrated that fast moving, weak tornadoes can leave a damage swath that appears straight-line. Also, the path was only a few houses wide and extended about eight miles long. I suspect that the act of God defense is better if there is a tornado, rather than if its only a straight-lined wind.

Steve wrote: In any event, I hope that this ripples through the industry to help promote/encourage better building standards. Sadly, I'm sure it will take several more lawsuits like this and needless deaths to make any impact.

REPLY: I don't think this case will have any affect on promoting better building practices. So long as the goal is the building code, then such failures will continue to occur. The building code is a minimum design. If the goal is the minimum, then chances are most homes will not meet the minimum due, in part, to workmanship factors. I've asked the question in the past that if the minimum to pass an exam is 70 percent, and that is your goal, then what are the chances you will pass? So, I believe there will be similar cases in the future.

tm

tm

[shane turner]

That is a shame a 10 year-old girl had to lose her life because some construction company was negligent for not putting lugs on the anchor bolts and not nailing them deep enough into the foundation. It makes me wonder how well-constructed my house is. Tim did this house sustain high-end EF1 or maybe low-end EF2 damage. Like you said the roof appears to have only sustained minimal damage, but parts of the house looks like it was shifted or moved off the foundation causing it to fail and killing this poor young girl.

[Bill Doms]

Interesting. The case settled out of trial today.

http://kstp.com/article/stories/S744476.shtml?cat=1

I wonder if it is one of those private settlements where the builder and subcontractors don't admit guilt despite the evidence presented during discovery or if it was economically more feasible for the defendants to just settle the case than have a lengthy (and expensive) court battle?

Regardless, I do believe this case may very well open the door for other weather related death instances where the integrity of a structure could be in question. Evidently the big questions in this case involved the spacing of the plate anchors and how the blocks were core filled where the anchors were located.

[Tim Marshall]

Shane asked: "Tim did this house sustain high-end EF1 or maybe low-end EF2 damage?"

REPLY: IMO, the house sustained high-end EF0 or maybe low-end EF1 damage. I figured the three-second wind speeds needed to knock the home off its foundation were between 80 and 100 MPH. That's actually LESS than or equal to the building code value of a 100 MPH three-second gust. Check out some interesting news stories that WCCO-TV did regarding poorly anchored homes:

http://wcco.com/consumer/better.home.construction.2.765736.html

http://wcco.com/topstories/walk.out.basements.2.361860.html

http://wcco.com/goodquestion/homes.built.tough.2.734272.html

tm

[cdcollura]

Good day...


Originally Posted by JF Massicotte http://www.stormtrack.org/forum/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.stormtrack.org/forum/showthread.php?p=207887#post207887)
Maybe a little off-topic, but someday someone will sue SUV owners after his house is destroyed by a Hurricane...


You'll need to translate that one again - how are SUV's are hurricanes related?

That's an easy one ... SUV's burn more gas = More C02 = Global Warming = More hurricanes (to chase) :-)