An Update from Our Firm about COVID-19

Abraham, Watkins, Nichols, Sorrels, Agosto, Aziz & Stogner remains fully operational and committed to serving our clients and colleagues throughout the Coronavirus (COVID-19) crisis. As we follow the CDC guidelines and practice social distancing, we remain available for phone consultations and scheduled in-person meetings with both current and prospective clients and colleagues. Please contact our office by email or by calling 713-222-7211 with any questions. We look forward to hearing from you.

Supreme Court Rules against Homeowner

Even though a company's employee stated the foundation repair it performed was the "worst" job he had seen, the Texas Supreme Court ruled in favor of the company and against the homeowner in the recent case of Gonzales v. Southwest Olshan Foundation Repair Company, ___ S.W.3d ___ (Tex. 2013).

In Olshan, the homeowner had initially suffered foundation problems due to a water leak. So, she contacted a plumber as well Southwest Olshan Foundation Repair Company. The contract documents stated that Olshan would perform the job in a good and workmanlike manner.

Months after the repair, the homeowner discovered "doors not locking, windows not opening, and new cracks appearing." A year later, Olshan excavated tunnels for further plumbing repairs, and then leveled the foundation three months after that. But it had to be called out again in just two months for additional repairs. While there, a crewmember told the homeowner it was the "worst job I have ever seen," and even advised her to contact an attorney. When she would not let Olshan fill in the tunnels based upon the employee's advice, Olshan left the jobsite for many months. But, in the meantime, it had sent an engineer who claimed the foundation was functioning properly. The following year, it again sent an engineer who claimed the foundation was proper. A year after that, when more cracking appeared, she hired her own engineer, who pointed out several ways the foundation repair was flawed. Based upon that, she filed suit the next month.

At trial, the jury returned a verdict in the homeowner's favor. But the Supreme Court reversed the jury, and ruled against the homeowner in two ways. First, it held that her remedies under the Deceptive Trade Practices Act were barred by limitations. She asserted that limitations should be extended by a common law doctrine called fraudulent concealment, since the engineers sent by Olshan assured her that the foundation was proper. But the Court said that a 180-day provision in the statute overruled the common law on this issue.

Second, the court ruled that a different common law doctrine to protect consumers had been superseded by the contract from Olshan. In particular, it has been the rule in Texas for 25 years, since a case called Melody Home, that the law will imply a warranty that the repair of tangible goods or property will be performed in a good and workmanlike manner. In the present case, the Supreme Court determined that this common law duty was addressed by the contract. "Because the parties' agreement here specifies that the service provider would perform foundation repair in a good and workmanlike manner and adjust the foundation for the life of the home due to settling, the express warranty sufficiently describes the manner, performance, or quality of the services so as to supersede the Melody Home implied warranty." By this fashion, Olshan was able to escape its duty imposed by the common law.

If you or someone you know have been a victim of a deceptive trade practice, contact the attorneys at Abraham, Watkins, Nichols, Sorrels, Agosto & Friend by calling 713-396-3964 or 1-800-594-4884.

No Comments

Leave a comment
Comment Information
  • $50+ Million Fire & Explosion

    The firm successfully represented nearly 100 victims who suffered personal injuries and damages to property from a large fire and explosion resulting in a settlement of more than $50 million. The firm served as lead lawyers on the steering committee in this litigation.

  • $80 Million Plant Explosion

    The firm successfully represented 270 plaintiffs, taking a lead role in the plaintiffs’ steering committee, who suffered injuries in a large plant explosion resulting in a settlement of nearly $80 million.

  • $50+ Million Plant Fire & Explosion

    The firm successfully represented 45 personal injury victims in a plant fire and explosion, serving on the plaintiffs steering committee, concluding with a settlement of more than $50 million.

  • $22+ Million Worksite Accident

    The firm prevailed in a personal injury trial for a worksite injury client with the jury returning a verdict and resulting in a judgment of over $22 million for the firm’s client.

  • $12 Million 18-Wheeler Collision

    The firm successfully achieved a $12 million settlement for the family of a man who died in an 18 wheeler collision.

  • $48 Million Catastrophic Burns

    The firm prevailed on behalf of three burn victims with settlements totaling nearly $48 million.

Our Record Of Success

When you are hurt and you choose a law firm to represent you in court or at the negotiation table, you need to carefully consider the firm's record.

Read More Success Stories

Let Us Help You Request a Free Consultation Today

Get Help Now

Bold labels are required.

Contact Information

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.


Privacy Policy

Back to top