The Subrogation Strategist

Often times, subrogation practitioners take the “kitchen sink” approach when pursuing claims: they name all potentially liable parties under all available legal theories and whittle down from there. With construction defect cases in particular, the difficulty of identifying exactly who did what and which contractual provisions have which effect can lead to the decision to throw everything against the wall and see what sticks. However, in some cases, dealing with the ensuing motion practice from that approach just is not worth it.

In Proe, et. al. v. Diamond Homes et. al., 2025 ... Continue Reading

In Morningside Ministries v. Koontz McCombs Construction, Ltd., No. 08:23-00332-cv, 2025 Tex. App. Lexis 3584 (Morningside), the Court of Appeals of Texas (Court of Appeals) considered whether the plaintiff’s construction defect claims were “inherently undiscoverable,” thereby tolling the applicable limitations period under the discovery rule. The lower court granted the defendants’ summary judgment motions, finding that the plaintiff’s breach of contract and breach of express warranty claims were brought outside of the four-year limitations period. On ... Continue Reading