Summary Judgment in Favor of Airco Mechanical

Posted by

Summary Judgment in Favor of Airco Mechanical

Cadence McShane Construction Company, LLC vs. Airco Mechanical, LTD., Cause No. DC-10-09085, In the District Court of Travis County, Texas, 250th Judicial District (2012):

Our client, Direct Energy U.S. Home Services acquired the assets and name of the plumbing, heating and air-conditioning installation and repair company, Airco Mechanical, Ltd., during the course of the company’s work on the Tuscany Center commercial development in Austin, Texas. When exterior plumbing leaks were subsequently discovered at the Tuscany site, Direct Energy retained the Storm Law Firm to defend the litigation brought by the general contractor, Cadence McShane, and to help the company identify the parties responsible for the leaks.

The firm’s meticulous review of city inspection reports and other documents obtained in discovery uncovered substantial evidence indicating that a subcontractor other than Airco was the party last in time to work on the water yard line, and thus the party most likely to have made the water line connection that was the source of one of the leaks. Armed with this evidence, our firm persuaded Cadence McShane to nonsuit Airco with respect to one of the Tuscany Center claims.

We then moved for summary judgment on all remaining claims against the new Airco entity on the basis that Cadence McShane had misnamed Airco in connection with work that predated Direct Energy’s asset acquisition. Based on the strength of our summary judgment motion, Cadence Mcshane and the other defendant in the case agreed to our proposed summary judgment and dismissed Airco from the case on the eve of trial. As a result, our client was not only spared the expense of trial, it also was shielded from any liability for the six-figure jury verdict that was subsequently entered against the remaining defendant.