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
Post a Comment