An arbitrator awarded a homeowner a total of $231,287 in damages for defective EIFS, which included the cost to reclad their home and award for attorneys fees and arbitration expenses. Read a PDF copy of the arbitration award.
(If you don't have Adobe Acrobat or Acrobat Reader, you may download it here.)

Florida Times-Union story on the mold controversy

ABCNews.com offers tips from the EPA on how to reduce your home's vulnerability to toxic mold.

On April 8, a Tennessee court granted preliminary approval to a nationwide settlement of Dryvit EIFS claims for one and two-family residential structures.

"Norfolk Circuit Judge Joseph A. Leafe found that Dryvit Inc.,
the nation's largest manufacturer of the material, knew its product was defective but sold it anyway."

For a copy of the judge's opinion, please click here for PDF version.
(If you don't have Adobe Acrobat or Acrobat Reader, you may download it here.)

"Faux Stucco, Real Problems"

Helen Parker-Smith v. Sto Corporation, et al.
Record No. 002184
A homeowner appealed from the circuit court's dismissal of her claims alleging false advertising, breach of warranty, and fraud arising out of the application of a synthetic stucco material.

The Supreme Court concluded that the statutory default limitation period in Code § 8.01-248 applies to a cause of action for false advertising, affirming the circuit court's judgment as to those counts. The Court did not reach the merits of the counts alleging breach of warranty and fraud because the circuit court had independent grounds for dismissal that were not assigned as error.

Charles McMillion, et al. v. Dryvit Systems, Inc.
Record No. 002802
Appellant's claims of false advertising and fraud arising out of an allegedly defective synthetic stucco product were dismissed by the circuit court as untimely and improperly pleaded.

The Supreme Court affirmed, concluding that the statutory default limitation period in Code § 8.01-248 applies to a cause of action for false advertising and noting that Appellant's third amended motion for judgment failed to include either claims of non-disclosure or allegations of misrepresentation of existing facts.

"Silent Killers": article on house stricken with mold

Santa Clara County gets $12 Million settlement in EIFS case

'Explosion' of Cases Involving Synthetic Stucco Being Filed

Fairfax, VA stucco verdict in excess of one million dollars.

Click here to see the June 1999 order in the North Carolina class action, Ruff v. Parex, et al.

Class Action Opt-Out Form

Click here to view a presentation on EIFS given on 6/20/2000 in Kiawah, South Carolina

Click here for information on how to obtain materials from a recent Advanced Stucco Seminar in North Carolina.

EIFS IN THE NEWS

Click here to read a Dateline story on home warranties

Click here to read a Washington Post article discussing a recent synthetic stucco lawsuit in Fairfax County, Virginia.

Click here to read a recent Wall Street Journal article spotlighting EIFS Legal Network's Stuccolaw.com.

Click here to see a new report on the EIFS controversy at ExtraTV.com

Click here to read the Dateline NBC Story on synthetic stucco,"Is your home crumbling around you," at MSNBC online.