Legal Opinion

Chandiwala v. Pate Const. Co.

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided March 26, 2004No. 1021940PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Farook Chandiwala appeals from a summary judgment entered in favor of Pate Construction Company ("Pate") and Dillard Plastering Company ("Dillard"). We affirm.

I. Facts and Procedural History

On August 11, 1992, Chandiwala purchased a house constructed by Pate. Dillard had applied an exterior insulation and finishing system ("EIFS") on the house when it was built. Dryvit Systems, Inc., manufactured the EIFS. EIFS, or "Dryvit," is a multilayered exterior wall system consisting of a finishing coat, a base coat, mesh, and insulation board, all of which are secured to plywood or substrate…

Also in this document: Dissent.

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. West v. Founders Life Assur. Co. of FloridaSupreme Court of Alabama · 1989
  2. Bussey v. John Deere Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1988
  3. Garrett v. Raytheon Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1979
  4. SYSTEM DYNAMICS INTERN., INC. v. BoykinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1996
  5. Kelly v. ShropshireSupreme Court of Alabama · 1917

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Bryant Bank v. Talmage Kirkland & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 2014
  2. Gilmore v. M B Realty Co., L.L.C.Supreme Court of Alabama · 2004
  3. Desouza v. LauderdaleCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 2005
  4. Verneuille v. Buchanan Lumber of Mobile, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 2005
  5. Choice Builders v. Complete Landscape Serv.Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 2006

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API