Recent Updates

  • July 17, 2008 8:19 AM
    Claims may exist under Consumer Fraud Act whether or not direct contact occurred between consumer and violator of ActJudge Louis Locascio of the New Jersey Superior Court recently ruled in the matter of Matera et. al. v. M.G.C.C. Group, Inc. et. al., Docket No. L-1812-04, that a cause of action under New Jersey’s Consumer Fraud Act exists where there is no direct contact between the parties but there is a connection between the defendants’ “alleged violation of the Consumer Fraud Act and plaintiff’s ascertainable loss.”
  • July 2, 2008 8:38 AM
    Municipalities Cannot Require Builders to Provide Common Open SpacesThe New Jersey Appellate Division ruled this month in two companion cases, New Jersey Shore Builders Association v. Township of Jackson, A-5805-06 (June 23, 2008) and Builders’ League of South Jersey v. Egg Harbor Township, A-1563-07 (June 23, 2008), that municipalities cannot require as a condition of approval that builders and developers provide on-site recreation areas or facilities, or common open space, outside the context of planned unit developments.
  • March 31, 2008 8:04 AM
    Homeowner's Association Standing To Assert Without Joining the HomeownersDonald B. Brenner, Shareholder and Chair of Stark & Stark's Construction Litigation group has authored the article Homeowner's Association Standing To Assert Without Joining the Homeowners for the March 24, 2008 edition of the New Jersey Law Journal.
  • March 25, 2008 4:03 PM
    $5 Million Verdict In Favor Of New Jersey Residential High-Rise BuildingOn March 11, 2008, in the matter of Camelot Condominium Association, Inc v. Dryvit Systems, Inc., pending before the Superior Court of New jersey, Docket No. BER-L-012457-04, a jury entered a verdict in favor of the Plaintiff and against Dryvit...
  • March 4, 2008 3:29 PM
    Condo Association Equitably Estopped from Consumer Fraud Act Relief When Its Conduct Resulted in the ViolationAfter a condominium association president declined a contractor’s request to execute a written change order and directed the contractor to proceed with the additional work, the association was barred from seeking relief under the Consumer Fraud Act (“CFA”) (N.J.S.A. 56:8-1 to -167) provisions requiring that all modifications to contracts for home improvements be in writing. B & H Securities, Inc., v. CKC Condominium Ass’n, Inc., 2008 WL 508082 (App. Div., February 27, 2008).
  • December 12, 2007 8:32 AM
    Property Owner Did Not Waive Arbitration Clause by Participating in LawsuitIn an unpublished case, the Appellate Division recently affirmed the trial court’s decision that defendant property owner did not waive the arbitration clause of its AIA construction contract with plaintiff construction company by participating in plaintiff lawsuit for a year before invoking the arbitration clause.
  • November 30, 2007 8:31 AM
    Consumers Cannot Waive Regulatory Requirement for Written Home Improvement ContractsThe Appellate Division recently denied a landscaping contractor’s suit to collect amounts due for extra work in addition to that called for in his contract for complete landscaping of the defendants’ home. Online Contracting, Inc. v. Tripucka, No. A-2622-06 (App....
  • November 13, 2007 11:01 AM
    Gehry - Construction Defects are InevitableWorld famous architect Frank Gehry, and his firm Gehry Partners is a defendant in a recent lawsuit brought by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology alleging design and construction defects in a $300 Million building on the Cambridge, Massachusetts campus.
  • October 23, 2007 2:40 PM
    Builder's Risk Policy Does Not Cover Damage to City Sewer PipePlaintiff WHP9, the developer of a multi-building residential project in North Bergen, secured a builder’s risk policy from defendant Centennial Insurance and liability insurance from another carrier before beginning construction.
  • October 8, 2007 8:08 AM
    Appellate Division Enforces Terms of Association’s Insurance PolicyIn an unpublished decision, the Appellate Division recently enforced an insurer’s duty to indemnify and defend a condominium association for damages resulting from an occurrence during the policy period even though they were not discovered until after the policy had expired. Steinbauer v. East Coast Acquisitions, LLC, 2007 WL 2593007 (App. Div. September 11, 2007).

Stark & Stark Web Sites