Construction

Collapse and Structural Failure

Lawyers at Arent Fox offer the following experience related to collapse and structural failure representations:

• The City of New York in the defense of claims asserting that a fuel tank negligently constructed, located, operated or maintained by the city contributed to the fire at 7 World Trade Center, causing the building’s collapse in the wake of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.
• The structural engineer-of-record for the World Trade Center against multimillion dollar claims for personal injury and property damages in the wake of the 1993 terrorist attack on the World Trade Center. The matter was successfully resolved on motion practice without any payment by the client.
• A structural engineering firm in the defense of claims by the owner of the John Hancock Building in Boston asserting that there was design defects in the superstructure of the building. Our attorneys retained forensic engineers to conduct analyses to refute a theory developed by the plaintiff’s expert. The research, when coupled with other information obtained during the course of discovery, led to a favorable resolution of the dispute.
• The structural engineer who designed the Schoharie Bridge more than 40 years before. The bridge on the New York State Thruway collapsed after heavy rains and a series of floods in the area, killing 10 people. This engagement required our lawyers not only to formulate a defense strategy but also to protect the client and his design firm from the media, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and various governmental boards of inquiry. Our lawyers deployed forensic teams to gather information about both the original design of the bridge and the maintenance program implemented by the Thruway Authority during the years since its original design and construction. They managed the complex discovery process and the negotiation of multiple claims aggregating more than $200 million as well as developed a strategic plan that resulted in the collection of evidence that demonstrated that others caused the failure.
• The structural engineer who designed the East Coldenham Elementary School (Newburgh, New York) after nine children were killed when the south façade of the school collapsed as the result of an extreme storm. The lawyers’ document control system facilitated the organization, retrieval and analysis of voluminous project documentation and experts’ reports. The case involved multiple plaintiffs and multiple insurance carriers. After several years of discovery, depositions and motion practice, the plaintiffs’ claims were settled, with the client making only a modest contribution to the overall settlement.
• The structural engineer for the Javits Center (New York City) in a multiparty dispute involving claims and cross-claims totaling more than $65 million arising out of alleged defects in the design and construction of the building’s intricate space frame. The lawyers eventually persuaded the parties to mediate the dispute, which involved seven teams of lawyers representing various parties and their insurance carriers. The matter was favorably resolved.
• The building owner after the collapse of a 90,000 square foot warehouse facility in Orange County, New York, under snow loading conditions similar to those that caused the Hartford Civic Center collapse. After conducting significant discovery and motion practice, the defendants settled this matter, following opening arguments to the jury, on a basis highly favorable to the client.
• A prominent architectural/engineering firm in South Florida in defense of claims totaling $20 million in excess of the firm’s professional liability insurance coverage limits. The case was a subrogation action brought by an insurance company after the collapse of a new corporate headquarters building in the wake of Hurricane Andrew. The case was settled prior to trial in a manner favorable to the client.

Collapse and Structural Failure Description