- 5 -
Petitioners go on to point out that (1) “landfill was added to
the sides of the house to hide the fact that foundations were
improperly set”; (2) “the location of the sewer” and “the
thickness of the stucco” did not conform to the housing plan,
without notice to petitioners; and (3) Mr. Green misrepresented
that the land was “engineered,” when “there was no engineering of
the soil besides grading.” Petitioners assert that Mr. Green
misrepresented the quality of his houses and his role in their
construction in promotional materials and misrepresented that Mr.
Cabber was an architect. Petitioners further assert that “Mr.
Green had no intention to cure or even acknowledge any defects
and he made himself absent from the state by moving to Las
Vegas.”
Respondent contends that petitioners have failed to prove
that Mr. Green’s conduct constituted a theft under New Mexico
law. Respondent notes that Mr. Green obtained the requisite
building permit, hired subcontractors whom he had worked with
before, was present at the construction site on a daily basis,
oversaw the subcontractors’ work, and, once construction of
petitioners’ house was completed, received a certificate of
occupancy from the county. With respect to Mr. Cabber’s
credentials, respondent notes that neither the preconstruction
agreement nor the contract provided that an architect would
design petitioners’ house and that petitioners never asked Mr.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008