Preview
FILED
1/30/2024 1:50 PM
FELICIA PITRE
DISTRICT CLERK
26147.0033 DALLAS CO., TEXAS
Jenifer Trujillo DEPUTY
CAUSE NO. DC-23-02885
CHARLES DAVID WOOD JR. and § IN THE DISTRICT COURT
LOLA BRIDGETTE WOOD §
§
vs. § 134TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
§
BUILDERS FIRST SOURCE DALLAS, LLC; §
SAWMILL PARTNERS LLC D/B/A RICHARDSON §
TIMBERS; RIDGEVIEW TIMBERWORKS LLC § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
DEFENDANT BFS TEXAS SALES, LLC f/k/a BMC TEXAS SALES LLC,
incorrectly sued as BUILDERS FIRST SOURCE DALLAS’
DESIGNATION OF EXPERTS
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
NOW COMES Defendant BFS TEXAS SALES, LLC f/k/a BMC TEXAS SALES LLC,
incorrectly sued as BUILDERS FIRST SOURCE DALLAS, LLC (hereinafter “BFS”) filing this its
Designation of Expert Witnesses, and for such would respectfully show the following:
I. RETAINED EXPERTS
In supplementation of any and all pertinent interrogatory answer, responses to requests for
production, and responses to requests for disclosure, BFS hereby designates the following persons
as retained expert witnesses to testify during the trial of the above-entitled and numbered cause:
(1) Ian M. McLin
LANGLEY & BANACK
745 E. Mulberry, Suite 700
San Antonio, Texas 78212
(210) 736-6600
Mr. McLin is expected to testify regarding the reasonable and necessary attorneys’
fees in this litigation, including a reasonable and necessary hourly rate of $375.00
per hour, the nature and extent of the services provided in the pending litigation,
the value of such legal services, and attorneys’ fees on appeal. The opinion of Mr.
McLin is based on some or all of the following factors: (1) the time and labor
required, the novelty and difficulty of the questions involved, and the skill required
to perform the legal service properly; (2) the likelihood that the acceptance of the
particular employment will preclude other employment by the lawyers; (3) the fee
customarily charged in the locality for similar legal services; (4) the amount
involved and the results obtained; (5) the time limitations imposed by the client or
by the circumstances; (6) the nature and length of the professional relationship
with the client; (7) the experience, reputation, and ability of the lawyer or lawyers
performing the services; and (8) whether the fee is fixed or contingent based on
BFS’ Desig of Experts Page 1 of 7
26147.0033
results obtained or uncertainty of collection before the legal services have been
rendered.
Mr. McLin has reviewed and will review correspondence, pleadings, discovery,
document production, depositions, and privileged documents and tangible items
herein. Additionally, counsel will review Plaintiff’s fee invoices and cost
statements once produced.
The individual biography of Mr. McLin can be viewed at
https://www.langleybanack.com/professionals/ian-m-mclin/.
Mr. McLin’s attorney fee invoices for January 2023 – August 2023 were previously
produced as BFS 0081-0131.
Mr. McLin’s attorney fee invoices for September 2023 – January 2024 are produced
as BFS 0646-0692.
Additional attorney fee invoices will be supplemented through trial.
(2) Kerry Lee, M.B.A., P.E.
FORENSIX CONSULTING, LLC
And/or the Custodian of Records
1227 Windmere Way
Allen, Texas 75013
(214) 663-9404
BFS’ Retained Engineering Expert
Mr. Lee is a licensed structural engineer who will offer testimony with regard to
the pergola/patio cover structure at issue in this case, the deficient/defective design
of the structure, lack of proper architectural design and oversight, lack of proper
structural design and oversight, lack of proper construction direction and oversight,
and installation of exterior doors and windows.
Mr. Lee will opine and offer testimony on the appropriate standards of care as well
as with regard to his qualifications to offer expert testimony. He will offer
testimony on the various roles and responsibilities of design and construction
professionals involved in the project and with regard to the documentation he has
reviewed. He may rely upon, respond to, or otherwise adopt and/or expound upon
opinions of other experts in this matter. He may also offer rebuttal testimony with
regard to testimony offered by other experts herein. Generally, he is of the opinion
that:
Mr. Lee is of the opinion that the fabricated trusses lacked structural design due to
the error by Ridgeview to engage Mr. Perkins, or another structural engineer, to
perform a structural design and produce structural plans for the trusses. Based on
BFS’ Desig of Experts Page 2 of 7
26147.0033
available information, the lack of structural design for the gable trusses for the Plaza
Structures is not the fault of Mr. Perkins or RTP Structural. However, the error
would likely have been caught if a formal submittal process had been implemented
by the General Contractor which would have resulted in the distribution of the truss
information from Ridgeview to the design professionals for review.
Mr. Lee is of the opinion that Ridgeview failed in its responsibility to obtain a
structural engineering design for the gable trusses it designed and fabricated to
fulfill its order from Sawmill. The conduct of Ridgeview constituted an error by
Ridgeview in supplying the trusses for the Plaza Structures which was not known
by BFS.
Mr. Lee is further of the opinion that the trusses designed and fabricated by
Ridgeview were modified by the construction team after delivery, without the
knowledge and authorization of Ridgeview, which structurally impacted the
capacity of the trusses. This conduct by the construction team and the resulting
undetermined reduction in structural capacity was not known by BFS.
He bases this opinion on his education, training, skill and experience as well as
review of documents described in the attached report.
Based on review of received information, site investigation, professional
experience and analysis, Mr. Lee is of the opinion that the Wood Plaza Structures
project was defective from conception due to the lack of proper architectural design
and oversight, the lack of proper structural design and oversight, and the lack of
proper construction direction and oversight.
Mr. Lee is further of the opinion that the Owner/General Contractor violated the
applicable standard of care for construction of the project by:
1. Not applying for a building permit and submitting project design plans and
documentation to the City of Dallas for review and approval.
2. Not properly engaging its design professionals to coordinate and oversee the
project through typical construction administration and submittal processes.
3. For inappropriately assuming design responsibilities for the structure beyond
its capabilities and expertise due to the deficiencies in the original design plans.
These assumed design responsibilities include but are not limited to the design
and construction of the steel post columns and the design and installation of the
connections and fasteners throughout the structure.
4. For field modifying the gable trusses designed, fabricated, and supplied by
Ridgeview without the knowledge and authorization of Ridgeview.
It is Mr. Lee 's opinion that the as-designed Plaza Structures lack any structural
specifications or details for the main lateral force resisting system (LFRS) for the
structure or for the post columns to transfer gravity loads from the roof into the
foundation system, and no information or specifications were provided for any
BFS’ Desig of Experts Page 3 of 7
26147.0033
structural connections. Therefore, the Structural Engineer of Record, Skaggs,
violated its standard of care for structural design since it failed to provide the
structural capacity and load paths for the structure required by the 2015 IRC / 2015
DRC.
The Plaza Structures were not simple structures, and they should not have been
constructed without proper design and construction oversight. Mr. Lee is of the
opinion the Plaza Structures were not compliant with the prescriptive specifications
provided by the 2015 IRC / 2015 DRC such that an Owner/General Contractor and
its construction team could not competently accomplish the construction using the
prescriptive language of the building code and without the input and specifications
from its design professional(s).
As the supplier of materials to the project with no design, erection, or construction
involvement beyond the delivery of the materials ordered by the client based on the
construction documents submitted, BFS did not know and could not be expected to
know about the underlying error in the truss design by Ridgeview. Further, BFS
was not involved in the architectural or structural design of the Plaza Structures,
and the identification of defects in the design of structures performed by others for
which it is supplying materials is beyond its reasonably expected responsibilities
for the scope of services provided. Additionally, it was reasonable and customary
for BFS to rely upon the competency of its sub-suppliers, Sawmill and Ridgeview,
to properly provide materials and to fulfill their design and fabrication
responsibilities in compliance with the order from BFS.
Mr. Lee will testify as to his opinions contained in the previously produced report
and same are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in its totality.
Information reviewed by Mr. Lee as described in the report were previously
produced by various parties in this case, however, copies of same are available for
production upon request.
Materials Provided, Reviewed, or Prepared by Expert:
All documents, tangible things, reports, models and/or data compilations that have
been provided to, reviewed by, or prepared by or for the expert in anticipation of
such testimony are in the possession, custody and/or control of Kerry Lee, set forth
in his report, and available for review/download through the following link:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/wx58r8awqnj0mks/AAA83M5eY23zXBLdgX4GFMaAa?dl=0
Mr. Lee’s CV, testimony list, and fee schedule are produced as BFS 0716-0744 and
his report dated January 29, 2024 is produced as BFS 0693-0715.
Discovery is ongoing, and BFS reserves the right to supplement this response.
BFS’ Desig of Experts Page 4 of 7
26147.0033
II. CROSS-DESIGNATION OF EXPERTS
BFS hereby cross-designates and states that it may call any expert identified or designated
by an adverse party or an employee or representative of an adverse party to elicit expert opinions
subject to any objections BFS makes concerning the designation of such experts and the admissibility
of their opinions.
BFS reserves the right to supplement this designation with additional designations of
experts within the time limits imposed by the Court or any alterations of same by subsequent Order
or agreement of the parties, or pursuant to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure and the Texas Rules
of Civil Evidence.
BFS reserves the right to elicit, by way of cross-examination, opinion testimony from
experts designated and called by other parties to this suit. BFS expresses its intention to call, as
witnesses associated with adverse parties, any of the party’s experts.
BFS reserves the right to call un-designated rebuttal expert witnesses whose testimony
cannot reasonably be foreseen until the presentation of the evidence presented by Plaintiff.
BFS reserves the right to withdraw the designation of any expert and to aver positively that
any such previously designated expert will not be called as a witness at trial, and to re-designate
same as a consulting expert, who cannot be called by all party’s counsel.
BFS reserves the right to elicit any expert opinion or lay opinion testimony at the time of
trial which would be truthful, which would be of benefit to the Court to determine material issues
of fact, and which would not be in violation of any existing Order or the Texas Rules of Civil
Procedure.
BFS designates, as adverse parties, potentially adverse parties, and/or as witnesses
associated with adverse party, all parties to this suit and all experts designated by any party to this
suit, even if the designating party is not a party to the suit at the time of final hearing. In the event
a present or future party designates an expert but then is dismissed for any reason from the suit or
fails to call any designated expert, BFS reserves the right to designate and/or call any such party
or any such experts previously designated by any party.
BFS reserves whatever additional rights it might have with regard to experts, pursuant to
the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, the Texas Rules of Evidence, the case law construing same,
and the rulings of the Court.
The designation shall serve to supplement any responses to interrogatories, requests for
production and request for disclosures as propounded by BFS and accordance with the Texas Rules
of Civil Procedure.
BFS cross-designates as experts those persons or entities designated as experts by any other
party in this matter, but reserves the right to challenge such designations. BFS also reserves the
right to seek opinion testimony by cross examination of all expert witnesses obtained or retained
BFS’ Desig of Experts Page 5 of 7
26147.0033
by any other party in this case. By so designating and reserving this right, BFS is not necessarily
adopting each of the opinions of those experts. For further information regarding their testimony,
please refer to their records and reports and to their deposition testimony if and when taken, as
well as any testimony at the time of trial. BFS INCLUDES ALL PERSONS IDENTIFIED BY
ALL OTHER PARTIES, INCLUDING PRESENT AND FUTURE, IN THEIR RESPONSES TO
DISCOVERY REQUESTS OR LISTED AS EXPERTS, INCLUDING ANY THAT ARE
SUPPLEMENTED.
Respectfully submitted,
LANGLEY & BANACK
745 E. Mulberry, Suite 900
San Antonio, Texas 78212
(210) 736-6600
(210) 735-6889 facsimile
By: _________________________________
IAN M. McLIN
State Bar No. 24005071
imclin@langleybanack.com
ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT,
BFS TEXAS SALES, LLC f/k/a
BMC TEXAS SALES LLC, incorrectly sued as
BUILDERS FIRST SOURCE DALLAS, LLC
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been delivered in
accordance with Tex. R. Civ. P. 21(a) on this the 30th day of January, 2024, to the following counsel
of record:
Via E-Service: edocsnotifications@reiddennis.com
Mr. William E. Reid
REID DENNIS & FRICK
2600 Cole Avenue, Suite 300
Dallas, Texas 75204
Counsel for Plaintiff Charles David Wood Jr. and
Counsel for Bella Estates 1, Inc.
Counsel for Daniel Zipperlen
BFS’ Desig of Experts Page 6 of 7
26147.0033
Via E-Service: mail@rlattorneys.com
Mr. Mark S. Senter
Ms. Ciera Norris
RESNICK & LOUIS, P.C.
2425 N. Central Expressway, Suite 231
Richardson, Texas 75080
Counsel for Defendant, Sawmill Timbers LLC d/b/a Richardson Timbers
Via E-Service: wtribble@tribblelawfirm.com
Via E-Service: dmcmanus@tribblelawfirm.com
Via E-Service: rhems@tribblelawfirm.com
Mr. Wesson H. Tribble
Mr. Dan McManus
Mr. Russell Hems
TRIBBLE | ROSS
6371 Richmond Avenue
Houston, Texas 77057
Counsel for Defendant, Ridgeview Timberworks LLC
IAN M. McLIN
BFS’ Desig of Experts Page 7 of 7
Report of Findings
PROJECT NO.
00149.00
CAUSE NO.
DC-23-02885
PROJECT IDENTIFICATION
Wood Residence – Plaza Structures
5518 Winston Court
Dallas, Texas 75220
PREPARED FOR
Ian McLin
Langley & Banack, Incorporated
745 East Mulberry Avenue
Suite 700
San Antonio, Texas 78212
BFS 0693
BFS 0694
Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures
January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00
Page 1
INTRODUCTION
GENERAL INFORMATION
Dates of Investigation: December 7, 2022
January 3, 2023
February 28, 2023
Present at Investigation: Kerry S. Lee, P.E. – 12/7/2023 and 1/3/2023
Lauren E. Kelley, P.E. – All Dates
PURPOSE AND AUTHORIZATION OF INVESTIGATION
Langley & Banack, Incorporated on behalf of BFS Group, LLC (BFS) authorized Forensix
Consulting, LLC (Forensix) to conduct a site investigation to evaluate the collapsed North
Plaza Structure and the intact South Plaza Structure which were being constructed at 5518
Winston Court in Dallas, Texas (subject site and structure); review received information;
and respond to findings contained in the reports prepared by W. Tom Witherspoon, Ph.D.,
P.E., (Witherspoon) prepared on behalf of Peskuski Design Group and Paragon Structural
Engineering (Paragon) prepared for William E. Reid on behalf of the plaintiffs, Charles and
Lola Wood, specifically related to the scope of services provided by BFS.
SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION
Forensix reviewed received information; conducted a visual evaluation of the subject site
and both plaza structures (aka "North Plaza Structure" and "South Plaza Structure" in this
report); and photographically documented general site conditions and the collapsed North
Plaza Structure and the intact South Plaza Structure. During its site investigations, Forensix
observed and documented the extraction of evidence from the collapsed North Plaza
Structure to be retained as evidence by representatives of the Plaintiff. Additionally, at the
request of Forensix, three concrete cores were extracted for strength testing from the
concrete foundation for the North Plaza Structure by Henley | Johnston & Associates (HJA).
The complete Forensix investigative file is part of this ongoing investigation, forms a basis
for this report and the opinions contained herein, and is adopted by reference. Photographic
documentation and other field-obtained data related to the subject site and structures are
being maintained in the Forensix project file.
BFS 0695
Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures
January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00
Page 2
PROVIDED INFORMATION
In addition to on-site observations, the opinions presented in this report may be based on
the following information received by Forensix as part of this investigation:
Invoice INV0199 for the concrete below the Plaza Structures, prepared by Ochoa
Concrete Company, dated October 26, 2021.
Architectural Plan Sheet A-1, Bella Estates, Wood Residence, Plaza Structure #1,
prepared by Peskuski Design Team (Peskuski), not sealed, dated
November 3, 2021.
Structural Plan Sheet S-1, Wood Residence, prepared by Skaggs Engineering
(Skaggs), sealed by Matthew R. Skaggs (Texas Professional Engineer License No.
105165, Texas Engineering Firm No. F-12387), dated November 17, 2021.
Photographs of collapsed North Plaza Structure and the shored South Plaza
Structure, date taken unknown, photographer unknown.
Quotation prepared by Builders FirstSource, QT Number 62321873, dated
July 12, 2022.
Quotation prepared by Builders FirstSource, QT Number 62322115, dated
July 12, 2022.
Quotation prepared by Builders FirstSource, QT Number 62322198, dated
July 12, 2022.
Credit Application and Agreement for Builders FirstSource.
Photographs taken during erection of the Plaza Structure(s), Bates Labeled Plaintiffs
000244 through Plaintiffs 000249, dated circa July 2022.
Report prepared by W. Tom Witherspoon, Ph.D., P.E. (Witherspoon) for Jay
Peskuski of the Peskuski Design Firm, Bates Labeled Plaintiffs 000129 through
Plaintiffs 000133, dated January 16, 2023.
Report prepared by Paragon Structural Engineering (Paragon) for Reid, Dennis &
Frick, Bates Labeled Plaintiffs 000010 through Planitiffs 000122, dated May 15,
2023.
Plaintiffs Document Production, Bates Labeled Plaintiffs 000010 through Plaintiffs
000251.
BFS 0696
Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures
January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00
Page 3
Sawmill Partners Document Production, Bates Labeled Sawmill 000001 through
Sawmill 000064.
Ridgeview Timberworks Document Production, Bates Labeled Ridgeview000001
through Ridgeview000153.
Deposition of Written Questions of Ralph Trent Perkins, RTP Structural, dated
July 28, 2023.
Construction Material Testing Acceptance / Set Up Form from Henley|Johnston,
dated February 7, 2023.
Report of Concrete Core Strength Test prepared by Henley|Johnston (HJA), dated
March 7, 2023.
Oral and Videotaped Deposition of Phillip Douglas Grindstaff dated
September 7, 2023.
Oral and Videotaped Deposition of Emilio Cantu dated October 2, 2023.
Videotaped Oral Deposition of R. Trent Perkins, P.E. dated October 11, 2023.
Oral Deposition of Scott Grindstaff as Corporate Representative of Ridgeview
Timberworks, LLC (Ridgeview) dated December 7, 2023.
Oral Deposition of Harley "Bubba" Finnell as Designated Corporate Representative
of Sawmill Partners, LLC D/B/A Richardson Timbers (Sawmill) dated December 19,
2023.
Oral Deposition of Charles David Wood dated December 20, 2023.
Oral Videotaped Deposition of Daniel Zipperlen dated January 5, 2024.
Oral Videotaped Deposition of Andria Lai dated January 5, 2024.
The documents identified include those specifically referenced herein. The above list
represents a subset of the information received by Forensix which is related to the Purpose
and Authorization of Investigation section of this report and may not constitute an
exhaustive list of the received information to date.
BFS 0697
Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures
January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00
Page 4
SITE DESCRIPTION
The subject site of the structural collapse of a wood-framed plaza structure, herein referred
to as "Wood Residence," "Plaza Structures" inclusive of a "North" or "Collapsed" Plaza
Structure and a "South" Plaza Structure" consisted of two (2) wood-framed outdoor
structures erected on a concrete slab located in a plaza area between the main residence
to the east and the vehicle garage structure to the west.
The two plaza structures were rectangular structures consisting of a custom main truss at
the north and south ends of each structure; wood framing for the beams, ridge, and rafters
of the roof structure; tube steel post columns at the four corners of each plaza structure to
support the roof structure; clay tiles on the roof; and stone veneer on the posts and at the
fireplace area. The intent presented on the plans was for the structures to be open on the
two long sides, closed on one short side with a stone fireplace, and open on the short side
opposite from the fireplace.
Refer to Figure 1 below for an aerial image of the site. For orientation, Winston Court is
considered the front and north side of the property for discussion purposes throughout this
report.
Plaza Area
Figure 1: Aerial Image of Site dated December 13, 2014 (Google LLC 2024 - annotated by Forensix).
BFS 0698
Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures
January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00
Page 5
APPLICABLE BUILDING CODE
The Architectural plans for the project do not include any reference to a building code.
The structural plans reference the 2015 International Residential Code (2015 IRC).
According to the City of Dallas ordinance number 30324, dated January 28, 2017, the
2015 IRC as amended by the City of Dallas (2015 Dallas Residential Code) took effect on
March 1, 2017. The Architectural and Structural plans were both dated subsequent to the
adoption of the 2015 IRC (2015 DRC), and construction of the buildings did not commence
until circa July 2022. There is no indication that the drawings for the Plaza Structures were
submitted to the City of Dallas for permit.
Based on review of available construction documentation, the dates of design and
construction, and the City of Dallas ordinance number 30324, Forensix is of the opinion
that the 2015 IRC with City of Dallas Amendments (2015 DRC) was the governing
building code for the design and construction of the project.
Further, Forensix is of the opinion that the General Contractor for the construction of
the Plaza Structures failed in its expected standard of care for construction by failing to
apply for a permit and submitting the construction documents to the City of Dallas for
review and approval.
The 2015 DRC includes, but is not limited to, the following minimum requirements:
R301.1 Application. Buildings and structures, and parts thereof, shall be
constructed to safely support all loads, including dead loads, live loads, roof
loads, flood loads, snow loads, wind loads and seismic loads as prescribed by
this code. The construction of buildings and structures in accordance with the
provisions of this code shall result in a system that provides a complete load
path that meets the requirements for the transfer of loads from their point of
origin through the load-resisting elements to the foundation. Buildings and
structures constructed as prescribed by this code are deemed to comply with
the requirements of this section.
R301.1.3 Engineered design. Where a building of otherwise conventional
construction contains structural elements exceeding the limits of Section R301
or otherwise not conforming to this code, these elements shall be designed in
accordance with accepted engineering practice. The extent of such design
need only demonstrate compliance of nonconventional elements with other
applicable provisions and shall be compatible with the performance of the
conventional framed system. Engineered design in accordance with the Dallas
Building Code is permitted for buildings and structures, and parts thereof,
included in the scope of this code.
BFS 0699
Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures
January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00
Page 6
REVIEW OF PARTIES INVOLVED
Based on review of the received documents, it is Forensix's understanding that the parties
listed in Table 1 were involved in the design and construction of the subject Plaza Structures
at the Wood Residence as indicated:
Table 1: Parties Involved in the Design and Construction of the Plaza Structures
Party Party's Involvement
Charles David Wood Owner and General Contractor
Ochoa Concrete Company Concrete Subcontractor for the concrete slab at the plaza
Peskuski Design Firm Conceptual Architectural Design for the Plaza Structures
Skaggs Engineering Structural Engineer of Record for the Plaza Structures
Daniel Zipperlen GC/Owner's Representative for Wood
Builders FirstSource (BFS) Timber Framing and Truss Supplier for the project
Emilio Cantu Sales Representative for BFS
Ridgeview Timberworks, LLC (Ridgeview) Contracted by Sawmill to design and fabricate the trusses
R. Trent Perkins, P.E. / RTP Structural, PLLC Consulting structural engineer for Ridgeview
Owner and Corporate Representative for Ridgeview
Scott Grindstaff
Timberworks, LLC
Phillip Douglas Grindstaff General Manager of Ridgeview Timberworks, LLC
Contracted by BFS to supply wood materials for the project
Sawmill Partners, LLC d/b/a Richardson
including the trusses for the project. Also supplied/procured
Timbers (Sawmill)
the wood for the trusses fabricated by Ridgeview
Referred the Peskuski (Architect) and Skaggs (Structural
Bella Estates
Engineer) to Mr. Wood for the Plaza Structures project.
Andria Lai Corporate Representative for Bella Estates
MV Framing Erector/framer for the Plaza Structures
Lopez Handyman Services Fabricated and installed 8 steel tube columns
Leroy Jordan Supplied plywood decking and clips
Lowes Store where nails and screws were purchased
Claudio Sosa Roofer
Truitt Winston GC/Owner's Representative for Wood prior to Zipperlen
Elk Creek Forest Products, LLC Supplied wood materials for the trusses to Sawmill
DeFord's Lumber supplier to Mr. Wood / Hunt Classic Designs
The above identified party involvement is Forensix's understanding based on the
information received prior to the issuance of this report but does not identify the complete
scope of work for each party and should not be construed as a comprehensive summary of
each party involved in the design and construction of Plaza Structures.
Based on available project information, the project lacked proper coordination of the
design and construction activities, did not have a building permit, and was directed by
Mr. Wood as the Owner/General Contractor. There was not a traditional professional
architect on the team to provide coordination of the project, the design professionals,
and the material suppliers; therefore, these duties clearly and intentionally fell upon the
Owner/General Contractor for the project.
BFS 0700
Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures
January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00
Page 7
As is discussed in this report, the Owner/General Contractor failed in its duty to: obtain
a building permit; coordinate the design, construction, and material procurement for the
project; and require and coordinate proper submittals and approvals from its design
professionals. The Owner/General Contractor relied upon verbal or electronic
coordination, direction, and instruction, to the extent any existed, or relied upon its
representatives of unknown engineering and construction experience and competence
to design and construct or coordinate the construction of the project.
REVIEW OF DESIGN DOCUMENTS
Peskuski Architectural Plans
The Peskuski architectural plan for the Plaza Structures is limited to a conceptual set of
elevations, a roof plan, and a floor plan that includes a "reflected ceiling" of the main
structural framing beams (two eave beams and one ridge beam) which are orientated in
the north-south direction. The architectural plan provided a graphical depiction of an end
gable arch profile that had an arched tie-beam or chord spanning between the top/rafter
chords and a vertical king post between the ridge and the tie-beam. It should be noted that
the architectural plan did not include a decorative rafter tail cut. Figure 1.5 from the
Paragon report is reproduced as Figure 2 below to provide consistent nomenclature for the
Forensix response to the Paragon report in this report.
Figure 2: Reproduction of Figure 1.5 from the Paragon Report for Truss Nomenclature.
BFS 0701
Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures
January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00
Page 8
The architectural plan did not graphically show the rafters on the plan.
Skaggs Structural Plans
The Skaggs structural plans for the Plaza Structures provide a foundation plan and a roof
framing plan. The structural plans were sealed by Skaggs as the engineering firm and the
structural engineer of record (SEOR) for the plaza structures. The structural plans cite and
indicate that the design is in accordance with the 2015 IRC.
On the foundation plan, the drawing indicated that the "foundation is existing."
The roof framing plan specified the following graphically and with text:
The columns are shown to be "stone column typical."
Two end trusses are shown and are specified as "Truss – By Others."
No center truss is shown.
The two main eave beams and the ridge beam are all specified as "6x18 Timber
Beam, Option to Use 5.25 x16 PSL."
"Rafters to be 2x6 spaced @ 24" oc."
"[End Gable] Truss Supports End of Ridge Beam, Design for a Load of 5.5 Kips."
Further, the notes on the plan specify the following:
All roof rafters to be 2x6 spaced at 24" oc.
All timber beams to be #1 grade SPF or cedar
Trusses design by others. Refer to arch for design shape. Design front truss to
support ridge beam as shown.
Roof design loads as follows:
o Dead Load – 15 PSF
o Live Load – 20 PSF
The Skaggs structural plans failed to include any specifications for any of the connections
or fasteners for the Plaza Structures, did not include any lateral bracing system for the Plaza
Structures, and did not include any structural specifications for the columns for the Plaza
Structures beyond, "Stone Column Typical." As presented, the structural design depicted
on the Skaggs structural plan lacks sufficient detail to construct structurally viable Plaza
Structures and violates the minimum provisions of Section 301 of the 2015 IRC /
2015 DRC and the expected standard of care for a structural engineer in the State of
Texas as discussed further in this report.
BFS 0702
Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures
January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00
Page 9
ANALYSIS OF EXPERT REPORTS
Forensix provides a review of or response to the expert reports received in this section of
the report, in bold text, including the reports prepared by W. Tom Witherspoon, Ph.D.,
P.E. (Witherspoon), and Paragon Structural Engineering (Paragon). The lack of a
review/response by Forensix to any portion of the reports in this case does not and should
not be construed to constitute agreement with any portion of the content of the reports.
REPORT BY WITHERSPOON
Witherspoon issued its report on January 16, 2023, which indicated it was based on an
inspection performed on December 7, 2022. In addition to discussing the failure pattern
of the failed end truss, Witherspoon includes the following opinions in its report:
Any arbor such as this must be able to meet the requirements of the 2021
International Residential Code, which states that this structure must resist a
115 mph wind load. This would necessitate installation of diagonal bracing at
the columns to resist this loading and the braces would have to be two
directions at each corner for a total of 8 diagonal braces to meet the wind
loading.
Forensix generally concurs with this opinion from Witherspoon that the structure as
designed by Skaggs lacks lateral capacity to transfer wind loads to the foundation system;
however, at the time of design, the structure had to comply with the 2015 IRC / 2015
DRC. In addition, Forensix is of the opinion that the Skaggs structural design was
structurally deficient since it did not include structural specifications for the post columns
or for any connections and fasteners. Forensix is of the opinion that the Skaggs structural
design was deficient and Skaggs violated its standard of care for a structural engineer in
the State of Texas.
REPORT BY PARAGON
Paragon issued its report on May 15, 2023. The Purpose of the report, "as outlined by the
client, was to provide an opinion regarding the cause of the collapse of one of the plaza
structures during construction."
BFS 0703
Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures
January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00
Page 10
The report indicates that the North Plaza Structure collapsed overnight from
October 28, 2022, to October 29, 2022, and that it was reported to them that a storm event
had occurred during that time period. Forensix reviewed the weather data included by
Paragon for the time period of interest and concurs that the maximum wind gust of 45 mph
in the vicinity of the site at Dallas Love Field was not of sufficient magnitude to have been
of concern for a properly designed and constructed structure. Further, the maximum wind
gust reported did not occur overnight during the reported time period of the collapse.
Ultimately, Paragon provides the following opinion related to the reported storm event
causing the collapse:
. . . PSE is of the opinion that a properly design/constructed (sic) plaza structure
should have been able to withstand the applied wind loads from the reported
storm event without incident. As a result, PSE is of the opinion that the
collapse of the north plaza structure is causally relate to one or more
design/construction defects."
Forensix concurs with this opinion not only related to the storm event, but also to the
numerous potential contributing causes of the structural collapse as discussed below.
Paragon continues in its report to discuss the "Mode of Collapse," and the "Cause of
Collapse." For the Mode of Collapse, Paragon opines:
Based on our observations, PSE is of the opinion that the mode of collapse of
the north plaza structure is consistent with a thrust failure in which the framing
of the structure was not apparently adequate to resist the outward thrust forces
applied at the plate line (top of headers) by the gable roof.
Forensix generally concurs with Paragon's opinion regarding the mode of collapse, but it
should be noted that Paragon failed to consider the influence of the improper structural
design by Skaggs resulting in a structure with undesigned load paths and lateral capacity,
and construction lifting activities and modifications to the truss by the General
Contractor and its construction team on the structural strength of the truss and its
connections as discussed below. The language used by Paragon, ". . . the framing of the
structure was not apparently adequate . . ." is indicative of its incomplete analysis.
For the "Cause of Collapse," Paragon states:
It should be noted that PSE did not perform a structural analysis of the as-built
plaza structures to determine the structural integrity of each building
component; rather, PSE performed a failure analysis of the as-built plaza
structures to determine the cause of the collapse. While a post-construction
structural analysis of an as-built structure may identify one or more
components of the structure that are not code-compliant with respect to load
capacity, a failure analysis is intended to identify the single component that
actually resulted in the failure that occurred.
BFS 0704
Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures
January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00
Page 11
Paragon continues,
Based upon our investigation, PSE is of the opinion that the collapse of the
north plaza structure is causally related to the design and/or fabrication of the
timber trusses at each end of the gable roof.
Forensix is of the opinion that purported "failure analysis" performed by Paragon is
incomplete and deficient to identify the causes of the structural failure. Since the stated
intent of its "failure analysis" was to only identify a single component that caused the
failure, Paragon's analysis appears to have been intended to achieve a pre-determined
outcome rather than to actually identify the contributing cause(s) of the failure. The
Paragon analysis failed to consider defects in the design and construction influences
which include, but are not limited to:
1. The improper and incomplete design performed by the SEOR for the project,
Skaggs. There was a complete lack of structural specification and details for
the main lateral force resisting system (LFRS) for the structure which includes:
a. No structural information or specifications for the post columns.
b. No structural information or specifications for any plan or vertical
bracing to resist lateral loads and displacement of the structure.
c. No structural information, specifications, or details for any
connections or fasteners.
2. The impact from modifications to the fabricated trusses and from the erection
of the trusses by the General Contractor and its construction team include,
but are not limited to:
a. Post-delivery manipulation of the trusses to cut a decorative pattern
into the rafter tails. It is unknown to Forensix how the truss was moved
and supported during modification to prevent distortion of the truss
and damage to the truss connections and fasteners resulting in
weakening of the trusses' structural capacity.
b. Post-delivery manipulation and modification of the trusses to cut much
larger beam seat bearing notches into the top chords of the fabricated
trusses without the knowledge of and authorization from the material
supplier, BFS, or the truss designer and fabricator, Ridgeview. It is
unknown to Forensix how the truss was moved and supported during
modification to prevent distortion of the truss and damage to the truss
connections and fasteners resulting in weakening of the trusses'
structural capacity.
BFS 0705
Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures
January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00
Page 12
c. Manipulation of the trusses to install the ridge beam through the peak
of the truss after it was erected. It is unknown to Forensix how the
truss was supported du
Preview
FILED 1/30/2024 1:50 PM FELICIA PITRE DISTRICT CLERK 26147.0033 DALLAS CO., TEXAS Jenifer Trujillo DEPUTY CAUSE NO. DC-23-02885 CHARLES DAVID WOOD JR. and § IN THE DISTRICT COURT LOLA BRIDGETTE WOOD § § vs. § 134TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT § BUILDERS FIRST SOURCE DALLAS, LLC; § SAWMILL PARTNERS LLC D/B/A RICHARDSON § TIMBERS; RIDGEVIEW TIMBERWORKS LLC § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS DEFENDANT BFS TEXAS SALES, LLC f/k/a BMC TEXAS SALES LLC, incorrectly sued as BUILDERS FIRST SOURCE DALLAS’ DESIGNATION OF EXPERTS TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: NOW COMES Defendant BFS TEXAS SALES, LLC f/k/a BMC TEXAS SALES LLC, incorrectly sued as BUILDERS FIRST SOURCE DALLAS, LLC (hereinafter “BFS”) filing this its Designation of Expert Witnesses, and for such would respectfully show the following: I. RETAINED EXPERTS In supplementation of any and all pertinent interrogatory answer, responses to requests for production, and responses to requests for disclosure, BFS hereby designates the following persons as retained expert witnesses to testify during the trial of the above-entitled and numbered cause: (1) Ian M. McLin LANGLEY & BANACK 745 E. Mulberry, Suite 700 San Antonio, Texas 78212 (210) 736-6600 Mr. McLin is expected to testify regarding the reasonable and necessary attorneys’ fees in this litigation, including a reasonable and necessary hourly rate of $375.00 per hour, the nature and extent of the services provided in the pending litigation, the value of such legal services, and attorneys’ fees on appeal. The opinion of Mr. McLin is based on some or all of the following factors: (1) the time and labor required, the novelty and difficulty of the questions involved, and the skill required to perform the legal service properly; (2) the likelihood that the acceptance of the particular employment will preclude other employment by the lawyers; (3) the fee customarily charged in the locality for similar legal services; (4) the amount involved and the results obtained; (5) the time limitations imposed by the client or by the circumstances; (6) the nature and length of the professional relationship with the client; (7) the experience, reputation, and ability of the lawyer or lawyers performing the services; and (8) whether the fee is fixed or contingent based on BFS’ Desig of Experts Page 1 of 7 26147.0033 results obtained or uncertainty of collection before the legal services have been rendered. Mr. McLin has reviewed and will review correspondence, pleadings, discovery, document production, depositions, and privileged documents and tangible items herein. Additionally, counsel will review Plaintiff’s fee invoices and cost statements once produced. The individual biography of Mr. McLin can be viewed at https://www.langleybanack.com/professionals/ian-m-mclin/. Mr. McLin’s attorney fee invoices for January 2023 – August 2023 were previously produced as BFS 0081-0131. Mr. McLin’s attorney fee invoices for September 2023 – January 2024 are produced as BFS 0646-0692. Additional attorney fee invoices will be supplemented through trial. (2) Kerry Lee, M.B.A., P.E. FORENSIX CONSULTING, LLC And/or the Custodian of Records 1227 Windmere Way Allen, Texas 75013 (214) 663-9404 BFS’ Retained Engineering Expert Mr. Lee is a licensed structural engineer who will offer testimony with regard to the pergola/patio cover structure at issue in this case, the deficient/defective design of the structure, lack of proper architectural design and oversight, lack of proper structural design and oversight, lack of proper construction direction and oversight, and installation of exterior doors and windows. Mr. Lee will opine and offer testimony on the appropriate standards of care as well as with regard to his qualifications to offer expert testimony. He will offer testimony on the various roles and responsibilities of design and construction professionals involved in the project and with regard to the documentation he has reviewed. He may rely upon, respond to, or otherwise adopt and/or expound upon opinions of other experts in this matter. He may also offer rebuttal testimony with regard to testimony offered by other experts herein. Generally, he is of the opinion that: Mr. Lee is of the opinion that the fabricated trusses lacked structural design due to the error by Ridgeview to engage Mr. Perkins, or another structural engineer, to perform a structural design and produce structural plans for the trusses. Based on BFS’ Desig of Experts Page 2 of 7 26147.0033 available information, the lack of structural design for the gable trusses for the Plaza Structures is not the fault of Mr. Perkins or RTP Structural. However, the error would likely have been caught if a formal submittal process had been implemented by the General Contractor which would have resulted in the distribution of the truss information from Ridgeview to the design professionals for review. Mr. Lee is of the opinion that Ridgeview failed in its responsibility to obtain a structural engineering design for the gable trusses it designed and fabricated to fulfill its order from Sawmill. The conduct of Ridgeview constituted an error by Ridgeview in supplying the trusses for the Plaza Structures which was not known by BFS. Mr. Lee is further of the opinion that the trusses designed and fabricated by Ridgeview were modified by the construction team after delivery, without the knowledge and authorization of Ridgeview, which structurally impacted the capacity of the trusses. This conduct by the construction team and the resulting undetermined reduction in structural capacity was not known by BFS. He bases this opinion on his education, training, skill and experience as well as review of documents described in the attached report. Based on review of received information, site investigation, professional experience and analysis, Mr. Lee is of the opinion that the Wood Plaza Structures project was defective from conception due to the lack of proper architectural design and oversight, the lack of proper structural design and oversight, and the lack of proper construction direction and oversight. Mr. Lee is further of the opinion that the Owner/General Contractor violated the applicable standard of care for construction of the project by: 1. Not applying for a building permit and submitting project design plans and documentation to the City of Dallas for review and approval. 2. Not properly engaging its design professionals to coordinate and oversee the project through typical construction administration and submittal processes. 3. For inappropriately assuming design responsibilities for the structure beyond its capabilities and expertise due to the deficiencies in the original design plans. These assumed design responsibilities include but are not limited to the design and construction of the steel post columns and the design and installation of the connections and fasteners throughout the structure. 4. For field modifying the gable trusses designed, fabricated, and supplied by Ridgeview without the knowledge and authorization of Ridgeview. It is Mr. Lee 's opinion that the as-designed Plaza Structures lack any structural specifications or details for the main lateral force resisting system (LFRS) for the structure or for the post columns to transfer gravity loads from the roof into the foundation system, and no information or specifications were provided for any BFS’ Desig of Experts Page 3 of 7 26147.0033 structural connections. Therefore, the Structural Engineer of Record, Skaggs, violated its standard of care for structural design since it failed to provide the structural capacity and load paths for the structure required by the 2015 IRC / 2015 DRC. The Plaza Structures were not simple structures, and they should not have been constructed without proper design and construction oversight. Mr. Lee is of the opinion the Plaza Structures were not compliant with the prescriptive specifications provided by the 2015 IRC / 2015 DRC such that an Owner/General Contractor and its construction team could not competently accomplish the construction using the prescriptive language of the building code and without the input and specifications from its design professional(s). As the supplier of materials to the project with no design, erection, or construction involvement beyond the delivery of the materials ordered by the client based on the construction documents submitted, BFS did not know and could not be expected to know about the underlying error in the truss design by Ridgeview. Further, BFS was not involved in the architectural or structural design of the Plaza Structures, and the identification of defects in the design of structures performed by others for which it is supplying materials is beyond its reasonably expected responsibilities for the scope of services provided. Additionally, it was reasonable and customary for BFS to rely upon the competency of its sub-suppliers, Sawmill and Ridgeview, to properly provide materials and to fulfill their design and fabrication responsibilities in compliance with the order from BFS. Mr. Lee will testify as to his opinions contained in the previously produced report and same are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in its totality. Information reviewed by Mr. Lee as described in the report were previously produced by various parties in this case, however, copies of same are available for production upon request. Materials Provided, Reviewed, or Prepared by Expert: All documents, tangible things, reports, models and/or data compilations that have been provided to, reviewed by, or prepared by or for the expert in anticipation of such testimony are in the possession, custody and/or control of Kerry Lee, set forth in his report, and available for review/download through the following link: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/wx58r8awqnj0mks/AAA83M5eY23zXBLdgX4GFMaAa?dl=0 Mr. Lee’s CV, testimony list, and fee schedule are produced as BFS 0716-0744 and his report dated January 29, 2024 is produced as BFS 0693-0715. Discovery is ongoing, and BFS reserves the right to supplement this response. BFS’ Desig of Experts Page 4 of 7 26147.0033 II. CROSS-DESIGNATION OF EXPERTS BFS hereby cross-designates and states that it may call any expert identified or designated by an adverse party or an employee or representative of an adverse party to elicit expert opinions subject to any objections BFS makes concerning the designation of such experts and the admissibility of their opinions. BFS reserves the right to supplement this designation with additional designations of experts within the time limits imposed by the Court or any alterations of same by subsequent Order or agreement of the parties, or pursuant to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure and the Texas Rules of Civil Evidence. BFS reserves the right to elicit, by way of cross-examination, opinion testimony from experts designated and called by other parties to this suit. BFS expresses its intention to call, as witnesses associated with adverse parties, any of the party’s experts. BFS reserves the right to call un-designated rebuttal expert witnesses whose testimony cannot reasonably be foreseen until the presentation of the evidence presented by Plaintiff. BFS reserves the right to withdraw the designation of any expert and to aver positively that any such previously designated expert will not be called as a witness at trial, and to re-designate same as a consulting expert, who cannot be called by all party’s counsel. BFS reserves the right to elicit any expert opinion or lay opinion testimony at the time of trial which would be truthful, which would be of benefit to the Court to determine material issues of fact, and which would not be in violation of any existing Order or the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. BFS designates, as adverse parties, potentially adverse parties, and/or as witnesses associated with adverse party, all parties to this suit and all experts designated by any party to this suit, even if the designating party is not a party to the suit at the time of final hearing. In the event a present or future party designates an expert but then is dismissed for any reason from the suit or fails to call any designated expert, BFS reserves the right to designate and/or call any such party or any such experts previously designated by any party. BFS reserves whatever additional rights it might have with regard to experts, pursuant to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, the Texas Rules of Evidence, the case law construing same, and the rulings of the Court. The designation shall serve to supplement any responses to interrogatories, requests for production and request for disclosures as propounded by BFS and accordance with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. BFS cross-designates as experts those persons or entities designated as experts by any other party in this matter, but reserves the right to challenge such designations. BFS also reserves the right to seek opinion testimony by cross examination of all expert witnesses obtained or retained BFS’ Desig of Experts Page 5 of 7 26147.0033 by any other party in this case. By so designating and reserving this right, BFS is not necessarily adopting each of the opinions of those experts. For further information regarding their testimony, please refer to their records and reports and to their deposition testimony if and when taken, as well as any testimony at the time of trial. BFS INCLUDES ALL PERSONS IDENTIFIED BY ALL OTHER PARTIES, INCLUDING PRESENT AND FUTURE, IN THEIR RESPONSES TO DISCOVERY REQUESTS OR LISTED AS EXPERTS, INCLUDING ANY THAT ARE SUPPLEMENTED. Respectfully submitted, LANGLEY & BANACK 745 E. Mulberry, Suite 900 San Antonio, Texas 78212 (210) 736-6600 (210) 735-6889 facsimile By: _________________________________ IAN M. McLIN State Bar No. 24005071 imclin@langleybanack.com ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT, BFS TEXAS SALES, LLC f/k/a BMC TEXAS SALES LLC, incorrectly sued as BUILDERS FIRST SOURCE DALLAS, LLC CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been delivered in accordance with Tex. R. Civ. P. 21(a) on this the 30th day of January, 2024, to the following counsel of record: Via E-Service: edocsnotifications@reiddennis.com Mr. William E. Reid REID DENNIS & FRICK 2600 Cole Avenue, Suite 300 Dallas, Texas 75204 Counsel for Plaintiff Charles David Wood Jr. and Counsel for Bella Estates 1, Inc. Counsel for Daniel Zipperlen BFS’ Desig of Experts Page 6 of 7 26147.0033 Via E-Service: mail@rlattorneys.com Mr. Mark S. Senter Ms. Ciera Norris RESNICK & LOUIS, P.C. 2425 N. Central Expressway, Suite 231 Richardson, Texas 75080 Counsel for Defendant, Sawmill Timbers LLC d/b/a Richardson Timbers Via E-Service: wtribble@tribblelawfirm.com Via E-Service: dmcmanus@tribblelawfirm.com Via E-Service: rhems@tribblelawfirm.com Mr. Wesson H. Tribble Mr. Dan McManus Mr. Russell Hems TRIBBLE | ROSS 6371 Richmond Avenue Houston, Texas 77057 Counsel for Defendant, Ridgeview Timberworks LLC IAN M. McLIN BFS’ Desig of Experts Page 7 of 7 Report of Findings PROJECT NO. 00149.00 CAUSE NO. DC-23-02885 PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Wood Residence – Plaza Structures 5518 Winston Court Dallas, Texas 75220 PREPARED FOR Ian McLin Langley & Banack, Incorporated 745 East Mulberry Avenue Suite 700 San Antonio, Texas 78212 BFS 0693 BFS 0694 Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00 Page 1 INTRODUCTION GENERAL INFORMATION Dates of Investigation: December 7, 2022 January 3, 2023 February 28, 2023 Present at Investigation: Kerry S. Lee, P.E. – 12/7/2023 and 1/3/2023 Lauren E. Kelley, P.E. – All Dates PURPOSE AND AUTHORIZATION OF INVESTIGATION Langley & Banack, Incorporated on behalf of BFS Group, LLC (BFS) authorized Forensix Consulting, LLC (Forensix) to conduct a site investigation to evaluate the collapsed North Plaza Structure and the intact South Plaza Structure which were being constructed at 5518 Winston Court in Dallas, Texas (subject site and structure); review received information; and respond to findings contained in the reports prepared by W. Tom Witherspoon, Ph.D., P.E., (Witherspoon) prepared on behalf of Peskuski Design Group and Paragon Structural Engineering (Paragon) prepared for William E. Reid on behalf of the plaintiffs, Charles and Lola Wood, specifically related to the scope of services provided by BFS. SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION Forensix reviewed received information; conducted a visual evaluation of the subject site and both plaza structures (aka "North Plaza Structure" and "South Plaza Structure" in this report); and photographically documented general site conditions and the collapsed North Plaza Structure and the intact South Plaza Structure. During its site investigations, Forensix observed and documented the extraction of evidence from the collapsed North Plaza Structure to be retained as evidence by representatives of the Plaintiff. Additionally, at the request of Forensix, three concrete cores were extracted for strength testing from the concrete foundation for the North Plaza Structure by Henley | Johnston & Associates (HJA). The complete Forensix investigative file is part of this ongoing investigation, forms a basis for this report and the opinions contained herein, and is adopted by reference. Photographic documentation and other field-obtained data related to the subject site and structures are being maintained in the Forensix project file. BFS 0695 Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00 Page 2 PROVIDED INFORMATION In addition to on-site observations, the opinions presented in this report may be based on the following information received by Forensix as part of this investigation: Invoice INV0199 for the concrete below the Plaza Structures, prepared by Ochoa Concrete Company, dated October 26, 2021. Architectural Plan Sheet A-1, Bella Estates, Wood Residence, Plaza Structure #1, prepared by Peskuski Design Team (Peskuski), not sealed, dated November 3, 2021. Structural Plan Sheet S-1, Wood Residence, prepared by Skaggs Engineering (Skaggs), sealed by Matthew R. Skaggs (Texas Professional Engineer License No. 105165, Texas Engineering Firm No. F-12387), dated November 17, 2021. Photographs of collapsed North Plaza Structure and the shored South Plaza Structure, date taken unknown, photographer unknown. Quotation prepared by Builders FirstSource, QT Number 62321873, dated July 12, 2022. Quotation prepared by Builders FirstSource, QT Number 62322115, dated July 12, 2022. Quotation prepared by Builders FirstSource, QT Number 62322198, dated July 12, 2022. Credit Application and Agreement for Builders FirstSource. Photographs taken during erection of the Plaza Structure(s), Bates Labeled Plaintiffs 000244 through Plaintiffs 000249, dated circa July 2022. Report prepared by W. Tom Witherspoon, Ph.D., P.E. (Witherspoon) for Jay Peskuski of the Peskuski Design Firm, Bates Labeled Plaintiffs 000129 through Plaintiffs 000133, dated January 16, 2023. Report prepared by Paragon Structural Engineering (Paragon) for Reid, Dennis & Frick, Bates Labeled Plaintiffs 000010 through Planitiffs 000122, dated May 15, 2023. Plaintiffs Document Production, Bates Labeled Plaintiffs 000010 through Plaintiffs 000251. BFS 0696 Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00 Page 3 Sawmill Partners Document Production, Bates Labeled Sawmill 000001 through Sawmill 000064. Ridgeview Timberworks Document Production, Bates Labeled Ridgeview000001 through Ridgeview000153. Deposition of Written Questions of Ralph Trent Perkins, RTP Structural, dated July 28, 2023. Construction Material Testing Acceptance / Set Up Form from Henley|Johnston, dated February 7, 2023. Report of Concrete Core Strength Test prepared by Henley|Johnston (HJA), dated March 7, 2023. Oral and Videotaped Deposition of Phillip Douglas Grindstaff dated September 7, 2023. Oral and Videotaped Deposition of Emilio Cantu dated October 2, 2023. Videotaped Oral Deposition of R. Trent Perkins, P.E. dated October 11, 2023. Oral Deposition of Scott Grindstaff as Corporate Representative of Ridgeview Timberworks, LLC (Ridgeview) dated December 7, 2023. Oral Deposition of Harley "Bubba" Finnell as Designated Corporate Representative of Sawmill Partners, LLC D/B/A Richardson Timbers (Sawmill) dated December 19, 2023. Oral Deposition of Charles David Wood dated December 20, 2023. Oral Videotaped Deposition of Daniel Zipperlen dated January 5, 2024. Oral Videotaped Deposition of Andria Lai dated January 5, 2024. The documents identified include those specifically referenced herein. The above list represents a subset of the information received by Forensix which is related to the Purpose and Authorization of Investigation section of this report and may not constitute an exhaustive list of the received information to date. BFS 0697 Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00 Page 4 SITE DESCRIPTION The subject site of the structural collapse of a wood-framed plaza structure, herein referred to as "Wood Residence," "Plaza Structures" inclusive of a "North" or "Collapsed" Plaza Structure and a "South" Plaza Structure" consisted of two (2) wood-framed outdoor structures erected on a concrete slab located in a plaza area between the main residence to the east and the vehicle garage structure to the west. The two plaza structures were rectangular structures consisting of a custom main truss at the north and south ends of each structure; wood framing for the beams, ridge, and rafters of the roof structure; tube steel post columns at the four corners of each plaza structure to support the roof structure; clay tiles on the roof; and stone veneer on the posts and at the fireplace area. The intent presented on the plans was for the structures to be open on the two long sides, closed on one short side with a stone fireplace, and open on the short side opposite from the fireplace. Refer to Figure 1 below for an aerial image of the site. For orientation, Winston Court is considered the front and north side of the property for discussion purposes throughout this report. Plaza Area Figure 1: Aerial Image of Site dated December 13, 2014 (Google LLC 2024 - annotated by Forensix). BFS 0698 Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00 Page 5 APPLICABLE BUILDING CODE The Architectural plans for the project do not include any reference to a building code. The structural plans reference the 2015 International Residential Code (2015 IRC). According to the City of Dallas ordinance number 30324, dated January 28, 2017, the 2015 IRC as amended by the City of Dallas (2015 Dallas Residential Code) took effect on March 1, 2017. The Architectural and Structural plans were both dated subsequent to the adoption of the 2015 IRC (2015 DRC), and construction of the buildings did not commence until circa July 2022. There is no indication that the drawings for the Plaza Structures were submitted to the City of Dallas for permit. Based on review of available construction documentation, the dates of design and construction, and the City of Dallas ordinance number 30324, Forensix is of the opinion that the 2015 IRC with City of Dallas Amendments (2015 DRC) was the governing building code for the design and construction of the project. Further, Forensix is of the opinion that the General Contractor for the construction of the Plaza Structures failed in its expected standard of care for construction by failing to apply for a permit and submitting the construction documents to the City of Dallas for review and approval. The 2015 DRC includes, but is not limited to, the following minimum requirements: R301.1 Application. Buildings and structures, and parts thereof, shall be constructed to safely support all loads, including dead loads, live loads, roof loads, flood loads, snow loads, wind loads and seismic loads as prescribed by this code. The construction of buildings and structures in accordance with the provisions of this code shall result in a system that provides a complete load path that meets the requirements for the transfer of loads from their point of origin through the load-resisting elements to the foundation. Buildings and structures constructed as prescribed by this code are deemed to comply with the requirements of this section. R301.1.3 Engineered design. Where a building of otherwise conventional construction contains structural elements exceeding the limits of Section R301 or otherwise not conforming to this code, these elements shall be designed in accordance with accepted engineering practice. The extent of such design need only demonstrate compliance of nonconventional elements with other applicable provisions and shall be compatible with the performance of the conventional framed system. Engineered design in accordance with the Dallas Building Code is permitted for buildings and structures, and parts thereof, included in the scope of this code. BFS 0699 Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00 Page 6 REVIEW OF PARTIES INVOLVED Based on review of the received documents, it is Forensix's understanding that the parties listed in Table 1 were involved in the design and construction of the subject Plaza Structures at the Wood Residence as indicated: Table 1: Parties Involved in the Design and Construction of the Plaza Structures Party Party's Involvement Charles David Wood Owner and General Contractor Ochoa Concrete Company Concrete Subcontractor for the concrete slab at the plaza Peskuski Design Firm Conceptual Architectural Design for the Plaza Structures Skaggs Engineering Structural Engineer of Record for the Plaza Structures Daniel Zipperlen GC/Owner's Representative for Wood Builders FirstSource (BFS) Timber Framing and Truss Supplier for the project Emilio Cantu Sales Representative for BFS Ridgeview Timberworks, LLC (Ridgeview) Contracted by Sawmill to design and fabricate the trusses R. Trent Perkins, P.E. / RTP Structural, PLLC Consulting structural engineer for Ridgeview Owner and Corporate Representative for Ridgeview Scott Grindstaff Timberworks, LLC Phillip Douglas Grindstaff General Manager of Ridgeview Timberworks, LLC Contracted by BFS to supply wood materials for the project Sawmill Partners, LLC d/b/a Richardson including the trusses for the project. Also supplied/procured Timbers (Sawmill) the wood for the trusses fabricated by Ridgeview Referred the Peskuski (Architect) and Skaggs (Structural Bella Estates Engineer) to Mr. Wood for the Plaza Structures project. Andria Lai Corporate Representative for Bella Estates MV Framing Erector/framer for the Plaza Structures Lopez Handyman Services Fabricated and installed 8 steel tube columns Leroy Jordan Supplied plywood decking and clips Lowes Store where nails and screws were purchased Claudio Sosa Roofer Truitt Winston GC/Owner's Representative for Wood prior to Zipperlen Elk Creek Forest Products, LLC Supplied wood materials for the trusses to Sawmill DeFord's Lumber supplier to Mr. Wood / Hunt Classic Designs The above identified party involvement is Forensix's understanding based on the information received prior to the issuance of this report but does not identify the complete scope of work for each party and should not be construed as a comprehensive summary of each party involved in the design and construction of Plaza Structures. Based on available project information, the project lacked proper coordination of the design and construction activities, did not have a building permit, and was directed by Mr. Wood as the Owner/General Contractor. There was not a traditional professional architect on the team to provide coordination of the project, the design professionals, and the material suppliers; therefore, these duties clearly and intentionally fell upon the Owner/General Contractor for the project. BFS 0700 Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00 Page 7 As is discussed in this report, the Owner/General Contractor failed in its duty to: obtain a building permit; coordinate the design, construction, and material procurement for the project; and require and coordinate proper submittals and approvals from its design professionals. The Owner/General Contractor relied upon verbal or electronic coordination, direction, and instruction, to the extent any existed, or relied upon its representatives of unknown engineering and construction experience and competence to design and construct or coordinate the construction of the project. REVIEW OF DESIGN DOCUMENTS Peskuski Architectural Plans The Peskuski architectural plan for the Plaza Structures is limited to a conceptual set of elevations, a roof plan, and a floor plan that includes a "reflected ceiling" of the main structural framing beams (two eave beams and one ridge beam) which are orientated in the north-south direction. The architectural plan provided a graphical depiction of an end gable arch profile that had an arched tie-beam or chord spanning between the top/rafter chords and a vertical king post between the ridge and the tie-beam. It should be noted that the architectural plan did not include a decorative rafter tail cut. Figure 1.5 from the Paragon report is reproduced as Figure 2 below to provide consistent nomenclature for the Forensix response to the Paragon report in this report. Figure 2: Reproduction of Figure 1.5 from the Paragon Report for Truss Nomenclature. BFS 0701 Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00 Page 8 The architectural plan did not graphically show the rafters on the plan. Skaggs Structural Plans The Skaggs structural plans for the Plaza Structures provide a foundation plan and a roof framing plan. The structural plans were sealed by Skaggs as the engineering firm and the structural engineer of record (SEOR) for the plaza structures. The structural plans cite and indicate that the design is in accordance with the 2015 IRC. On the foundation plan, the drawing indicated that the "foundation is existing." The roof framing plan specified the following graphically and with text: The columns are shown to be "stone column typical." Two end trusses are shown and are specified as "Truss – By Others." No center truss is shown. The two main eave beams and the ridge beam are all specified as "6x18 Timber Beam, Option to Use 5.25 x16 PSL." "Rafters to be 2x6 spaced @ 24" oc." "[End Gable] Truss Supports End of Ridge Beam, Design for a Load of 5.5 Kips." Further, the notes on the plan specify the following: All roof rafters to be 2x6 spaced at 24" oc. All timber beams to be #1 grade SPF or cedar Trusses design by others. Refer to arch for design shape. Design front truss to support ridge beam as shown. Roof design loads as follows: o Dead Load – 15 PSF o Live Load – 20 PSF The Skaggs structural plans failed to include any specifications for any of the connections or fasteners for the Plaza Structures, did not include any lateral bracing system for the Plaza Structures, and did not include any structural specifications for the columns for the Plaza Structures beyond, "Stone Column Typical." As presented, the structural design depicted on the Skaggs structural plan lacks sufficient detail to construct structurally viable Plaza Structures and violates the minimum provisions of Section 301 of the 2015 IRC / 2015 DRC and the expected standard of care for a structural engineer in the State of Texas as discussed further in this report. BFS 0702 Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00 Page 9 ANALYSIS OF EXPERT REPORTS Forensix provides a review of or response to the expert reports received in this section of the report, in bold text, including the reports prepared by W. Tom Witherspoon, Ph.D., P.E. (Witherspoon), and Paragon Structural Engineering (Paragon). The lack of a review/response by Forensix to any portion of the reports in this case does not and should not be construed to constitute agreement with any portion of the content of the reports. REPORT BY WITHERSPOON Witherspoon issued its report on January 16, 2023, which indicated it was based on an inspection performed on December 7, 2022. In addition to discussing the failure pattern of the failed end truss, Witherspoon includes the following opinions in its report: Any arbor such as this must be able to meet the requirements of the 2021 International Residential Code, which states that this structure must resist a 115 mph wind load. This would necessitate installation of diagonal bracing at the columns to resist this loading and the braces would have to be two directions at each corner for a total of 8 diagonal braces to meet the wind loading. Forensix generally concurs with this opinion from Witherspoon that the structure as designed by Skaggs lacks lateral capacity to transfer wind loads to the foundation system; however, at the time of design, the structure had to comply with the 2015 IRC / 2015 DRC. In addition, Forensix is of the opinion that the Skaggs structural design was structurally deficient since it did not include structural specifications for the post columns or for any connections and fasteners. Forensix is of the opinion that the Skaggs structural design was deficient and Skaggs violated its standard of care for a structural engineer in the State of Texas. REPORT BY PARAGON Paragon issued its report on May 15, 2023. The Purpose of the report, "as outlined by the client, was to provide an opinion regarding the cause of the collapse of one of the plaza structures during construction." BFS 0703 Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00 Page 10 The report indicates that the North Plaza Structure collapsed overnight from October 28, 2022, to October 29, 2022, and that it was reported to them that a storm event had occurred during that time period. Forensix reviewed the weather data included by Paragon for the time period of interest and concurs that the maximum wind gust of 45 mph in the vicinity of the site at Dallas Love Field was not of sufficient magnitude to have been of concern for a properly designed and constructed structure. Further, the maximum wind gust reported did not occur overnight during the reported time period of the collapse. Ultimately, Paragon provides the following opinion related to the reported storm event causing the collapse: . . . PSE is of the opinion that a properly design/constructed (sic) plaza structure should have been able to withstand the applied wind loads from the reported storm event without incident. As a result, PSE is of the opinion that the collapse of the north plaza structure is causally relate to one or more design/construction defects." Forensix concurs with this opinion not only related to the storm event, but also to the numerous potential contributing causes of the structural collapse as discussed below. Paragon continues in its report to discuss the "Mode of Collapse," and the "Cause of Collapse." For the Mode of Collapse, Paragon opines: Based on our observations, PSE is of the opinion that the mode of collapse of the north plaza structure is consistent with a thrust failure in which the framing of the structure was not apparently adequate to resist the outward thrust forces applied at the plate line (top of headers) by the gable roof. Forensix generally concurs with Paragon's opinion regarding the mode of collapse, but it should be noted that Paragon failed to consider the influence of the improper structural design by Skaggs resulting in a structure with undesigned load paths and lateral capacity, and construction lifting activities and modifications to the truss by the General Contractor and its construction team on the structural strength of the truss and its connections as discussed below. The language used by Paragon, ". . . the framing of the structure was not apparently adequate . . ." is indicative of its incomplete analysis. For the "Cause of Collapse," Paragon states: It should be noted that PSE did not perform a structural analysis of the as-built plaza structures to determine the structural integrity of each building component; rather, PSE performed a failure analysis of the as-built plaza structures to determine the cause of the collapse. While a post-construction structural analysis of an as-built structure may identify one or more components of the structure that are not code-compliant with respect to load capacity, a failure analysis is intended to identify the single component that actually resulted in the failure that occurred. BFS 0704 Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00 Page 11 Paragon continues, Based upon our investigation, PSE is of the opinion that the collapse of the north plaza structure is causally related to the design and/or fabrication of the timber trusses at each end of the gable roof. Forensix is of the opinion that purported "failure analysis" performed by Paragon is incomplete and deficient to identify the causes of the structural failure. Since the stated intent of its "failure analysis" was to only identify a single component that caused the failure, Paragon's analysis appears to have been intended to achieve a pre-determined outcome rather than to actually identify the contributing cause(s) of the failure. The Paragon analysis failed to consider defects in the design and construction influences which include, but are not limited to: 1. The improper and incomplete design performed by the SEOR for the project, Skaggs. There was a complete lack of structural specification and details for the main lateral force resisting system (LFRS) for the structure which includes: a. No structural information or specifications for the post columns. b. No structural information or specifications for any plan or vertical bracing to resist lateral loads and displacement of the structure. c. No structural information, specifications, or details for any connections or fasteners. 2. The impact from modifications to the fabricated trusses and from the erection of the trusses by the General Contractor and its construction team include, but are not limited to: a. Post-delivery manipulation of the trusses to cut a decorative pattern into the rafter tails. It is unknown to Forensix how the truss was moved and supported during modification to prevent distortion of the truss and damage to the truss connections and fasteners resulting in weakening of the trusses' structural capacity. b. Post-delivery manipulation and modification of the trusses to cut much larger beam seat bearing notches into the top chords of the fabricated trusses without the knowledge of and authorization from the material supplier, BFS, or the truss designer and fabricator, Ridgeview. It is unknown to Forensix how the truss was moved and supported during modification to prevent distortion of the truss and damage to the truss connections and fasteners resulting in weakening of the trusses' structural capacity. BFS 0705 Report of Findings Project Name: Wood Residence – Plaza Structures January 29, 2024 Project No.: 00149.00 Page 12 c. Manipulation of the trusses to install the ridge beam through the peak of the truss after it was erected. It is unknown to Forensix how the truss was supported du