Home/Supreme Court of Kansas/Haysville U.S.D. No. 261 v. GAF Corp.

Haysville U.S.D. No. 261 v. GAF Corp.

666 P.2d 192, 233 Kan. 635, 1983 Kan. LEXIS 344
CourtSupreme Court of Kansas
DecidedJune 10, 1983
Docket54,885
StatusPublished
Cited by57 cases

This text of 666 P.2d 192 (Haysville U.S.D. No. 261 v. GAF Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Haysville U.S.D. No. 261 v. GAF Corp., 666 P.2d 192, 233 Kan. 635, 1983 Kan. LEXIS 344 (kan 1983).

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Lockett, J.:

Early in 1974 Haysville School District No. 261 discovered that two elementary school buildings needed reroofing. Carmichael-Wheatcroft & Associates, P.A. (architects) were retained by the school district to determine the extent of repairs required in the repair of the two school building roofs. The architects prepared the specifications which included use of products manufactured by W. R. Grace & Company and GAF Corporation. The architects requested bids from contractors, requiring the bids to be submitted by June 19,1974, at 2:00 p.m. July 8, 1974, the contracts for reroofing were entered into between the school district and Ruckley Roofing Company, Inc. (roofing contractor).

December 3, 1974, just prior to completion of the reroofing, the school district and GAF entered into two “Inspection and Service Guarantees.” December 6, 1974, the roofing contractor completed work on the roof except for a few repair items that required warm weather, which were completed in April, 1975.

After installation of the new roofs, cracks appeared in both of the elementary school building roofs. The school district alleged that the cracks were caused by inadequate and defective materials provided by GAF. The school district contacted GAF and requested repairs to both of the leaking roofs. GAF denied liability under the contract with the school district. The school district incurred substantial repair bills and suffered interior damage to the school buildings which it alleged was caused by *637 water penetrating the outer roof membrane. The school district sued GAF in May, 1980, on several fault-based theories, including breach of warranties under the Uniform Commercial Code, negligence and fraud. In addition, the school district alleged breach of the inspection and service guarantees between it and GAF. The school district made no claim against GAF or any other individual involved in the repair of the roof for faulty installation.

GAF joined as third-party defendants (K.S.A. 60-214) the architects, the roofing contractor and the manufacturer of the lightweight concrete insulating material on which the roofs were placed, W. R. Grace & Company (Grace). GAF alleged the third-party defendants primarily were responsible for the damages and GAF was entitled to indemnity for any judgment the plaintiff school district might obtain.

The inspection and service guarantees were produced during discovery. The guarantee contracts between the school district and GAF allegedly were entered into after GAF oversaw and inspected insulation of the roofing membranes of the two schools. The contracts between GAF and the school district are reproduced as follows:

*638

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Akiem Lawson v. Hogan Dedicated Services, LLC, d/b/a Hogan Transports, Joshua Lorentz, Bindu Logistics, Inc.
D. Kansas, 2026
McGinness Energy Company, Inc. v. Independent Tubular Corporation, d/b/a ITC Pipe; Boly Pipe Co., Ltd; and Jol Tubular, Inc.
D. Kansas, 2025
Wolfe Electric, Inc. v. BlueScope Buildings North America, Inc.
D. Kansas, 2024
Ferrell v. K.B. Custom Ag Services LLC
D. Kansas, 2024
Coates v. Reichert
D. Kansas, 2024
UMB Bank, N.A. v. Monson
D. Kansas, 2023
Eagle v. USA Dent Company, LLC
D. Kansas, 2022
Murray v. Manorcare of Topeka KS, LLC
D. Kansas, 2022
MWCB Rock Road, LLC v. C&W Facility Services Inc.
D. Kansas, 2022
Conway Bank v. O'Brate Realty
Court of Appeals of Kansas, 2021
Water District No. 1 of Johnson County, Kansas v. S.J. Louis Construction, Inc.
D. Kansas, 2021
Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company v. Pal's Glass Service, Inc.
D. Kansas, 2021
Icon Structures, Inc. v. 84 Lumber Company, L.P.
D. Kansas, 2020
Atlantic Specialty Insurance Company v. Midwest Crane Repair, LLC
D. Kansas, 2020
Watson v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
D. Kansas, 2019
State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. v. Denson
Court of Appeals of Kansas, 2016
CoreFirst Bank & Trust v. Tuckness
Court of Appeals of Kansas, 2016
Unified School District 467 v. Leland A. Gray Architects, LLC
112 F. Supp. 3d 1223 (D. Kansas, 2015)
Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Bondwriter Southwest, Inc.
263 P.3d 633 (Court of Appeals of Arizona, 2011)
Emprise Bank v. Rumisek
215 P.3d 621 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
666 P.2d 192, 233 Kan. 635, 1983 Kan. LEXIS 344, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/haysville-usd-no-261-v-gaf-corp-kan-1983.