Skip to Navigation
The Collaborative Clearinghouse for Lawsuits and Other Claims Against ACE Group Insurance Companies

BANKERS STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY v. HAERTSCH AND COMPANY INC.

ATTENTION: It is possible that this information may no longer be current and therefore may be inaccurate. The index contains both open and closed cases and is not a complete list of cases in which an ACE Insurance Group company is involved. This information is provided to give interested persons an idea of the issues disputed in the indexed cases. For a full understanding of a case, one should read the rest of the court file, including the response. For the most up-to-date and complete information on a case, visit www.pacer.gov or contact the clerk of the relevant court.

Case Number: 
2:13-cv-02575 Search Pacer
ACE Group party(s): 
Court Type: 
Federal
US District Court: 
District of New Jersey
Date Filed: 
Apr 23 2013

"COUNT I
NEGLIGENCE

14. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 13 as if fully set forth herein.

15. The water leak and resulting damage referred to above resulted from the negligence, carelessness and/or recklessness of the defendant, and/or its agents, servants and/or employees, said negligence, carelessness and/or recklessness in failing to make a proper connection between the PEX water supply line and the copper elbow, in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions and accepted plumbing industry practices.

16. The defendant’s negligence was the legal, direct and proximate cause of the damages suffered by plaintiff.
WHEREFORE, plaintiff demands that judgment be entered in its favor and against the defendant, in an amount to be determined at trial, together with interest, costs and any other relief the Court deems just.

COUNT II
BREACH OF CONTRACT

17. Plaintiff hereby incorporates paragraphs 1 through 16 as though fully set forth herein.

18. Pursuant to the oral contract referred to above, the defendant was required to install the water supply line for the bathroom toilet in a prudent and reasonable manner and in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions.

19. The defendant breached this contract by failing to make a proper connection between the PEX water supply line and the copper elbow, in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions and accepted plumbing industry practices.

20. The breach of contract described above was the legal, direct and proximate cause of the water leak and the resulting damages suffered by the plaintiff.

WHEREFORE, plaintiff demands that judgment be entered in its favor and against the defendant, in an amount to be determined at trial, together with interest, costs and any other relief the Court deems just.

COUNT III
BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY

21. Plaintiff hereby incorporates paragraphs 1 through 20 as though fully set forth herein.

22. Pursuant to the contract referred to above, the defendant impliedly warranted that it would install the plumbing for the bathroom in a workmanlike manner, according to standard practices and in conformity with the manufacturer’s instructions.

23. The defendant breached this implied warranty by failing to connect the PEX water supply line with the copper elbow in conformity with the manufacturer’s instructions.

24. The breaches of implied warranty described above were the legal, direct and proximate cause of the flood and the resulting damages suffered by the plaintiff’s insured.

WHEREFORE, plaintiff demands that judgment be entered in its favor and against the defendant, in an amount to be determined at trial, together with interest, costs and any other relief the Court deems just."

The provided text is an excerpt from a document filed in this case. For a full understanding of the case, one should read the complete court file, including the response.

Javascript is required to view this map.