Gongloff Contracting, L.L.C. v. L. Robert Kimball & Associates, Architects & Engineers, Inc.
119 A.3d 1070
Pa. Super. Ct.2015Background
- 2009–2010 project: California University convocation center; Kimball designed, Whiting-Turner general contractor, Kinsley steel subcontractor, Gongloff subcontractor for steel erection.
- Vulcraft and Carney Engineering warned Kimball’s roof design was faulty; concerns about header beams and loads.
- Gongloff began erecting steel on March 17, 2010; mid-process, Vulcraft stated roof system not adequate for construction loads.
- Kimball acknowledged insufficiencies; May 3, 2010 Carney stated Kimball’s roof design was grossly inadequate; multiple design revisions followed.
- Gongloff submitted many change orders; payments halted by Kinsley; project costs increased; Gongloff laid off in February 2011.
- Gongloff filed negligent misrepresentation action against Kimball (and later others) in 2012; defense raised statute of limitations and economic loss doctrine defenses; court granted judgment on the pleadings in 2013; on appeal the decision was reversed and remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Section 552 requires explicit negligent misrepresentation | Gongloff argues Section 552 does not require express misrepresentation | Kimball argues Section 552 requires explicit misrepresentation | Section 552 does not require explicit misrepresentation |
| Whether Gongloff adequately pleaded express or implied representations by Kimball | Gongloff alleges Kimball supplied design information foreseeably relied upon | Kimball contends no precise express/implied representation identified | Amended complaint pled sufficient facts to state Section 552 claim; not barred at pleading stage |
Key Cases Cited
- Bilt-Rite Contractors, Inc. v. The Architectural Studio, 866 A.2d 270 (Pa. 2005) (adopted Section 552; design professionals liable for negligent information)
- Excavation Technologies, Inc. v. Columbia Gas Co. of Pennsylvania, 936 A.2d 111 (Pa. Super. 2007) (explained reach of Section 552 against architects on design information)
- State College Area School District v. Royal Bank of Canada, 825 F. Supp. 2d 573 (M.D. Pa. 2011) (negligent misrepresentation requires actual representation wording; federal case cited)
- Citicorp North America, Inc. v. Thornton, 707 A.2d 536 (Pa. Super. 1998) (standard for review of judgment on the pleadings; rests on true facts in record)