Professional Liability

On January 4, 2010, the plaintiffs entered into a contract with the defendant, an architect, for architectural services connected to the conversion of an existing garage into a kitchen and family room with a second story and to build a second-floor deck on top of a new two-car garage. The work commenced around October 2010 and ended around April or May 2011. On July 11, 2017, the plaintiffs filed an eight-count complaint against the architect and the contractor that performed the work alleging improper roof drainage and resultant water infiltration and mold growth.

The court found that the claims were subject to the six-year statute of limitations pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2A:14-1 and that the cause of action did not accrue until the water infiltration was discovered sometime in 2014. The court also found that, where the underlying factual allegations of the claim require proof of a deviation from the professional standard of care for an architect, an Affidavit of Merit is required. However, whether the activities performed by an architect are part of his responsibilities as an architect in connection with the construction project or a separate function of his responsibility to simply manage the worksite and, thus, whether or not an Affidavit of Merit is required, is a question of fact.

 

^{Case Law Alerts, 4th Quarter, October 2021 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2021 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}