McCLELLAN/CRUZ/GAYLORD

Ponderosa Center Partners v. McClellan/Cruz/Gaylord & Associates

Good Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 478·45 Cal. App. 4th 913·53 Cal. Rptr. 2d 64·96 Daily Journal DAR 5857·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3657
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 22, 1996B095494California1,423 words

Opinion

Opinion

McClellan/Cruz/Gaylord & Associates (MCG), an architectural firm, appeals from an order denying a motion for sanctions brought pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 411.35, subdivision (h). The trial court found that respondent, Ponderosa Center Partners, complied with section 411.35, the certificate of merit statute, when it consulted a structural engineer before filing suit against MCG for professional negligence. We affirm.

Facts

On April 27, 1992, a roof and canopy collapsed at the Ponderosa Shopping Center in Camarillo. Shortly after the collapse, respondent hired a structural engineer to investigate the possible causes. The investigation revealed that the shopping center was rebuilt in 1982 after a fire. MCG provided the architectural services and supervised the rebuilding. On May 4, 1992, respondent filed suit against MCG and the general contractor, Charles Licha, for breach of contract and negligence. Respondent’s attorney filed a section 411.35 certificate stating that he had “consulted with at least one architect or professional engineer who is licensed to practice and practices in this State, who is in the same discipline as the Defendants…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.