• Our attorney had the architect's report a full 9 months prior to trial. He had plenty of time to read the report, recognize the deficiency in the manner it was written, and ask the architect to either come back to the house and prepare a more detailed report or just rewrite the report using his notes from the first inspection. Pulte Homes' attorneys were able to block this expert's testimony and thus limit him to only giving testimony based on those 2 items specifically named in his written report. This again is per trial rules of procedure. Because of this error, no testimony was permitted concerning the structural defects in the house. Again, Pulte Homes did not dispute the existence of defects, just that the architects report limited his ability to testify as to the defects.
  
  
• My attorney either forgot or ignored an import issue with the architect. Although the architect stated in his report that the only way to properly repair our house was to tear it down and rebuild it, the architect did not recommend that method. At his deposition with Pulte Homes, with my attorney present, the architect was asked by Pulte Homes if he [the architect] was recommending tearing down the house. He answered "no". This deposition was taken months before trial and therefore giving my attorney ample time to prepare alternative testimony or corroborating testimony to maintain the integrity of the witness.
  
  
• When my attorney called our appraiser to the stand to testify, Pulte Homes requested and was granted an evidentiary hearing as to the competence of the appraiser to testify as an expert. Since prior to trial, Pulte Homes was successful in barring the repair estimate as evidence, our attorney needed the appraiser to determine and testify to the cost to rebuild the house and establish our damages. During this hearing, it was determined that the appraiser did not have the "experience in education or occupation" to determine the construction costs of rebuilding a home. It was also determined that the method the appraiser used along with the reference manual was not considered the industry recognized way to determine building costs. Therefore his testimony and report were barred from trial as it related to cost or damages. The appraiser was only permitted to testify to what the value of the house would be if no defects existed. Our attorney failed to investigate the credentials of his witness that would be needed to establish such costs as rebuilding a home.
  
  
• One of our complaints in the lawsuit was that Pulte Homes had violated The Ohio Consumer Sales Practices Act. We argued that Pulte Homes knew of the problems with the house but failed to act properly and gave false and misleading statements as to the condition of the house and the frame in particular when complaints were made. Our attorney either ignored or missed a vital piece of evidence that went toward our claim of Ohio Sales Practice violations. A letter was written back in 1995 to Pulte Homes from the president of the company that framed our home. In that letter, he itemized several defects in the construction and even added the commentary, "...this is not he best frame I've seen..." The same person that wrote the letter to Pulte Homes sent a letter to my home on the same date stating that everything was fine with the frame. See the two contradictory letters. This piece of evidence was never presented at trial or even mentioned. I did not learn of this second letter sent to Pulte Homes until after the trial was over while preparing for our appeal at another attorney's office.
  
  
• Our attorney failed to present other vital pieces of evidence or call important credible witnesses at trial. Below is a list of evidence and witnesses that our attorney had available to him but failed to use or call as witnesses:
  
  
  1. We had an engineer inspect the house and prepare a report. This report was detailed and itemized the failed floor joists and broken stair stringer along with other defects. The engineer was never called as a witness or even put on the witness list. The report was not used as well.
     
     
  2. During the discovery phase of the case, Pulte Homes hired their own appraiser to inspect my home. This appraiser did a walk-through, non-destructive visual inspection of the house. I was not permitted to show him any of the defects. He observed and reported on $10,000.00 worth of defects. This was never brought up during cross-examination of Pulte Home president, Greg Williams. Mr. Williams testified under oath that Pulte Homes made all the necessary repairs to the house. Some of the items on Pulte Homes appraiser's report listed items that were on our first 3-month warranty claim.
     
     
  3. Many of the defects in the home were found by Pulte Homes' employees. Those same employees informed us of the defects and showed them to us. Tim Moxly, Pulte Homes' service manager, stated that our home could not be repaired and that it would have been easier and cheaper to tear down the house and rebuild it. Our attorney never called him in to testify.
     
     
  4. Pat Murphy was the sub contractor that performed most of the work and found the lion's share of the defects. He had also told us that if we ever decided to sue Pulte Homes, he would testify on our behalf. Our attorney was made aware of this person and his willingness to testify. Our attorney did not try to locate this person. Our attorney claimed that Pulte Homes did not know how to get in touch with this person when asked during discovery. Pulte Homes would have had to know at least this persons social security number because they paid him a salary. If they did not have the social security number, then they were paying him under the table and could have had other legal problems with the IRS. Either my attorney never tried to get the information from Pulte Homes or he failed to use this information to our benefit.
     
     
  5. Besides the two people listed above, there were slews of other people sub contracted by or employed by Pulte Homes that had worked on our house. Not a single one of those workers were ever questioned about our house.

...BACK