Won Jury Verdict in Construction Industry Commercial Dispute

Represented a manufacturer in commercial litigation arising from construction defect and breach of warranty claims in connection with a contested industrial project in metro Atlanta. The case proceeded through a two-week Georgia state court jury trial. The defense verdict and successful application of OCGA § 51-12-33's apportionment framework substantially reduced the client's exposure and established protective precedent for similar industry disputes.

The Construction Defect Claims

The plaintiff alleged defects in the as-built industrial project, asserting construction defect and breach of warranty claims against multiple participants in the construction chain. The client's role as a manufacturer in a multi-party construction project placed it among several potentially responsible parties, including the general contractor, subcontractors, design professionals, and component suppliers. The case required disentangling the client's contractual scope, performance specifications, and quality controls from the broader construction record.

Apportionment and Non-Party Fault

Georgia's apportionment statute, OCGA § 51-12-33, requires the trier of fact to apportion damages by percentage of fault among all parties and non-parties contributing to the plaintiff's injury. The team filed timely non-party fault notices identifying every entity whose conduct contributed to the alleged defects and built a record establishing each contribution. Trial evidence presented the client's performance specifications, quality control records, and warranty parameters in parallel with the design and installation decisions of other construction-chain participants.

Verdict and Apportionment Outcome

After two weeks of trial, the jury returned a verdict allocating minimal fault to the client. The jury apportioned the substantial majority of damages exposure to other parties and non-parties under § 51-12-33. The verdict cleared the client of breach of warranty liability and substantially reduced the client's damages exposure on the remaining construction-defect findings. The outcome resolved the multi-claim litigation in a single proceeding and established protective precedent for the client's continuing role in metro Atlanta industrial projects.