Charles Kondla, of our Miami office, obtained summary judgment for his plumber client in a construction defect case. In short, the general contractor argued work performed by the plumber was causing issues with certain drains on several of the terrace balconies on the third story of the building. During his argument, Charlie pointed out that, although the allegations in the owner’s Complaint ostensibly implicated the plumber’s work, the owner’s own expert report (attached to the Complaint) conflicted with the allegations in the operative Complaint and did not place blame on the plumber’s work. In addition, Charlie pointed out to the Court the general contractor’s expert had failed to investigate and/or perform any testing to substantiate its claim that the plumber’s work was defective. That is, there was no record evidence the plumber did anything wrong. Charlie’s Motions for Summary Judgment on causation, common law indemnity, contractual indemnity, violation of Fla. Stat. 558.34, and breach of contract were granted as to all counts, and he got his client completely out of the case! In addition, a proposal for settlement was served early on in the case, which should allow for recovery of a substantial amount of fees.