Florida’s Scott Rejects Tampa-Orlando High-Speed Rail Line

By TIMOTHY WILLIAMS

Published: February 16, 2011

• 
  
  • Linkedin
  • Digg
  • Mixx
  • MySpace
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Permalin

Gov. Rick Scott of Florida on Wednesday rejected plans for a high speed rail line between Tampa and Orlando, in the process turning down $2 billion in federal funds and a key piece of President Obama’s goal of building a national high-speed rail network.
Florida is the third state with a newly elected Republican governor to turn down a portion of the administration’s high-speed rail project, joining John Kasich of Ohio and Scott Walker of Wisconsin. The Republican majority in the House of Representatives has also questioned the White House’s rail strategy.
The Obama administration has called for spending $53 billion on passenger trains and high-speed rail projects over the next six years as part of the president’s goal of making high-speed rail accessible to 80 percent of Americans within 25 years.
But critics said the need to link Tampa and Orlando — separated by 84 miles — paled in comparison with the necessity of high-speed rail along the busy Northeast corridor between Washington and Boston.
In a statement Wednesday, Mr. Scott said cost overruns related to the project could leave Florida taxpayers with an additional $3 billion tab. He also said he believed the federal government’s ridership and revenue estimates were too optimistic, and state taxpayers would be left to pay for ongoing subsidies.
Mr. Scott also said that if Florida started to build the project and then determined it was too costly to continue, the state would have to return $2.4 billion to the federal government.
“The truth is that this project would be far too costly to taxpayers, and I believe the risk far outweighs the benefits,” he said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/17/us/17rail.html

Plumbers Burned as a Result of Natural Gas ‘Odor Fade,’ but Damage Award Reversed

February 7, 2011


By Brienne Wesolek
Howrey LLP

A jury awarded plaintiffs Michael Sean Huitt, an experienced plumber, and Matt Nino, a plumber’s assistant, each more than $1 million in compensatory damages and $5 million in punitive damages against Southern California Gas Co. for injuries they sustained while attempting to light a water heater at a construction site owned by the Porterville Unified School District.

Federal regulations require that odorant be added to natural gas, which is colorless and odorless in its natural state, so that it is detectable by a person with a normal sense of smell. 49 CFR §192.625 (a).

It was undisputed that the natural gas supplied by the gas company was properly odorized. However, plaintiffs could not smell the gas because of “odor fade” – the odorant had been absorbed by the new steel gas pipes installed at the school.

Therefore, after initial attempts to light the water heater’s pilot light were unsuccessful, Huitt decided to bleed what he believed was air in the natural gas pipe. He thought the gas pipe still was under air test pressure, meaning the test air needed to be bled out until he could smell natural gas, which would fuel the pilot light and water heater. In fact, the pipe was filled with natural gas that had become odorless. When Huitt bled the pipe, the natural gas accumulated in the water heater closet where he and Nino were working. When Huitt again tried to light the pilot light, the accumulated natural gas exploded, badly burning him and Nino.

Evidence at trial showed that new steel gas pipes absorb the odorant until they become seasoned or saturated with odorant. Huitt testified that at the time of the accident, he did not know that the odorant in natural gas could fade.

A mechanical engineer who testified for plaintiffs stated that he had not heard of odor fade before this case but found a reference to it in the manual for the water heater. He testified that he spoke with others in the field about odor fade, and none of them had heard of it. But, he discovered information about it when he researched the issue on the Internet.

Another mechanical engineer, who specialized in plumbing engineering and had published more than 40 articles in plumbing publications, testified that in his 60 years of work in the plumbing field, he had never heard of odor fade until this case. He said he raised the issue at meetings of the Los Angeles chapters of the American Society of Plumbing Engineers and of the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials. No one at either meeting had heard of odor fade, including a representative of the gas company.

An engineer for the gas company described how new gas transmission pipes are pickled in odorant so they do not absorb odorant when put into use in transmitting gas. He testified this was the first instance he had seen of a customer’s pipes absorbing the odorant in natural gas.

The California Court of Appeal reversed the judgment entered on the jury’s verdict and directed the trial court to enter judgment in favor of the gas company. Huitt v. Southern California Gas Co., 188 Cal.App.4th 1586 (2010).

On appeal, the plaintiffs argued that the gas company had a duty to warn them that new pipes absorb the odorant in natural gas and that if they had known this, they would not have bled the gas pipe into the confined closet. The gas company denied that it had such a duty and denied that any failure to warn had caused the injuries.

Under California law, plaintiffs had the burden of proving that the gas company’s failure to issue a warning about the propensity of new steel pipes to adsorb the odorant in natural gas was a substantial factor in causing harm to them.

The appeals court held there was no evidence that if the gas company had issued a warning, the plaintiffs would have been aware of it. Because of this, the appeals court held, plaintiffs had not proved the gas company’s failure to warn caused their injuries. This precluded a recovery by them.

The appeals court wrote that plaintiffs’ arguments confused knowledge with causation. Although the plaintiffs presented evidence that allowed the jury to use hindsight to conclude that plaintiffs would have acted differently had they known of the possibility of odor fade, the court held that “mere knowledge is not enough to establish causation because it ignores the lack of evidence that any warning issued would have reached plaintiffs.” A warning that never reached the plaintiffs would not have changed events that occurred, the appeals court wrote.

A defendant is not liable to a plaintiff if the injury would have occurred even if the defendant had issued adequate warnings, the court wrote. The appeals court noted that plaintiffs did not introduce evidence at trial showing how a warning could have been issued and received by them. It noted, for example, that the water heater the plaintiffs were attempting to light had a label on it advising plaintiffs to read the installation manual and that the installation manual warned of the possibility of odor fade.

The appeals court acknowledged that odor fade is a potentially dangerous phenomenon that is not well known in the construction industry and that efforts should be made to inform people in the industry about it. The appeals court encouraged the gas company and others in the industry to educate those working with gas appliances about the phenomenon of odor fade. 

SOURCE: http://www.constructionweblinks.com/Resources/Industry_Reports__Newsletters/20110207/plum.html

SARASOTA ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR ATTORNEYS

Sarasota County Electrical Contractor Lawyers, Morgan Dramis, P.A.

Morgan Dramis, P.A. represents any person, firm, or corporation that engages in the business of electrical contracting under an express or implied contract; or that undertakes, offers to undertake, purports to have the capacity to undertake, or submits a bid to engage in the business of electrical contracting; or that does itself or by or through others engage in the business of electrical contracting. Our Firm handles all legal claims or defenses for all aspects of the performance of Electrical Contracting.

The legal issues facing Electrical Construction concern the installation, repair, alteration, add to, or design of, electrical wiring, fixtures, appliances, apparatus, raceways, conduit, or any part thereof, which generates, transmits, transforms, or utilizes electrical energy in any form, including the electrical installations and systems within plants and substations, all in compliance with applicable plans, specifications, codes, laws, and regulations.

Manatee County Electrical Contractor Attorney

The issues facing Electrical Contractors can be unique and require expert litigation support. At Morgan Dramis P.A. we use our firms resources to provide qualified experts capable of handling all forms of litigation testimony. Do not leave your Electrical Contractor claim or defense to someone who does not have the endorsement of the Florida Bar Construction Law Board Certification. George J. Dramis, Esq., possesses the Florida Bar Board Certification for Construction Law as well as receiving recognition in Florida SuperLawyers for 4 consecutive years.

If you are in need of speaking to a Sarasota County Electrical Contractor Attorney or a Manatee County Electrical Contractor Attorney, feel free to contact Morgan Dramis, P.A., we are ready to help you.

http://www.morgandramis.com/

Sarasota County Construction Law Attorney

There are over 84,000 Florida attorneys but only 166 attorneys (that's 1/10th of 1.00% !!!) are Board Certified in Construction Litigation. Only certified attorneys are allowed to identify themselves as "Florida Bar Board Certified" or as a "specialist." Certification is the highest level of recognition by The Florida Bar of the competency and experience of attorneys in the areas of law approved for certification by the Supreme Court of Florida.

Morgan Dramis, P.A. is your resource for a qualified Sarasota County Construction Law Attorney or a Manatee County Construction Law Attorney. The issues facing Contractors and Subcontractors can be unique and require expert litigation support. At Morgan Dramis P.A. we use our firms resources to provide qualified experts capable of handling all forms of litigation testimony. Do not leave your Construction Contractor claim or defense to someone who does not have the endorsement of the Florida Bar. George J. Dramis, Esq., has achieved Board Certification status in the field of Construction Law by the Florida Bar as well as receiving high praise recognition in the Florida SuperLawyers publication for 4 consecutive years.

Manatee County Construction Law Lawyer, Morgan Dramis, P.A. Lawyers certified in construction law deal with matters relating to the design and construction of improvements on private and public projects including, but not limited to, construction dispute resolution, contract negotiation, preparation, award and administration, lobbying in governmental hearings, oversight and document review, construction scheduling analysis and delay claims, lending and insurance, construction licensing, and the analysis and litigation of problems arising out of the Florida Construction Lien Law, section 255.05, Florida Statutes, and the federal Miller Act, 40 U.S.C. 3131-3134.Every board certified construction lawyer has practiced law on a full-time basis for at least five years and been substantially involved-40 percent or more-in the area of construction law during the three years preceding application.Each certified lawyer must also have passed peer review, completed 45 hours of continuing legal education within the three years preceding application and passed a written examination demonstrating knowledge, skills and proficiency in the field of construction law to justify the representation of special competence.Board certification is valid for five years, during which time the attorney must continue to practice law and attend Florida Bar-approved continuing legal education courses. To be recertified, requirements similar to those for initial certification must be met. Not all qualified lawyers are certified, but those who are board certified have taken the extra step to have their competence and experience recognized.Construction Law certification was approved by the Supreme Court of Florida in 2004.

If you would like to speak to a qualified Sarasota County Construction Law Attorney, please call Morgan Dramis P.A. today. (941) 953-4555.

http://www.morgandramis.com

Sarasota County Landscape Architect Attorney

Sarasota County Landscape Architect Attorney

Manatee County Landscape Attorney

Morgan Dramis, P.A. represents anyone involved in construction including Professional Landscape Architects. Issues may arise regarding those who practice landscape architecture and who have the experience, knowledge, and skill to engage in Consultation, investigation, research, planning, design, preparation of drawings, specifications, contract documents and reports, responsible construction supervision, or landscape management in connection with the planning and development of land and incidental water areas, including the use of Xeriscape as defined in s. 373.185, where, and to the extent that, the dominant purpose of such services or creative works is the preservation, conservation, enhancement, or determination of proper land uses, natural land features, ground cover and plantings, or naturalistic and aesthetic values; the determination of settings, grounds, and approaches for and the siting of buildings and structures, outdoor areas, or other improvements; the setting of grades, shaping and contouring of land and water forms, determination of drainage, and provision for storm drainage and irrigation systems where such systems are necessary to the purposes outlined herein; and the design of such tangible objects and features as are necessary to the purpose outlined herein.

Those engaged in Landscape design would also be those who engage in consultation for and preparation of planting plans drawn for compensation, including specifications and installation details for plant materials, soil amendments, mulches, edging, gravel, and other similar materials. Such plans may include only recommendations for the conceptual placement of tangible objects for landscape design projects.

Manatee County Landscape Architect Lawyer

Whether you are seeking a Landscape Attorney in Sarasota County or a Landscape Attorney in Manatee County, the Morgan Dramis, P.A. law firm can help. We have represented a wide range of landscape companies throughout Florida and are familiar with the issues commonly raised in these types of cases. You can rely on our firm to provide you with the best strategy for your case to obtain the best possible outcome.

Morgan Dramis, P.A. has Florida Bar Board Certified Attorneys standing by to assist you. Please call to set up an appointment today. (941) 953-4555.

http://www.morgandramis.com