McIntosh v. Progressive Design and Engineering, Inc. 2015 WL 71931 (Fla. 4th DCA January 7, 2015)

This case presents another application of the Slavin doctrine to an engineering company.  Plaintiff’s father was killed in a traffic accident caused by a patently defective design of a new intersection traffic signal.  The design engineer was sued as were other defendants, and the jury followed the judge’s instructions and found that, although there was a defect in the design, the defect was patent and the design was accepted by FDOT. This finding exonerated the design subcontractor from liability to the plaintiff.

The Court stated the following concerning the issue of “acceptance:” “Acceptance is the term applied for shifting the responsibility to correct patent defects to the party in control. In essence, acceptance will move along the timeline of a construction project, passing to each entity maintaining control of the work. This application makes perfect sense. Once an entity completes its work, and that work is accepted, the burden of correcting patent defects shifts to the entity in control.  It is the controlling entity’s intervening negligence in not correcting a patent defect that proximately causes the injury.”


From the Construction Regulation Subcommittee Monthly Report

Trenton H. Cotney
Florida Bar Certified Construction Lawyer
Trent Cotney, P.A.
407 N. Howard Avenue
Suite 100
Tampa, FL 33606

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Dotted Line: When Contractors Can Walk Off the Job

"Mass-timber" Sees Greater Use in Roofing and Construction Projects in Europe