DAVID MAMARIL HOROWITZ

david.horowitz@bgdailynews.com

New details have emerged in the lawsuit over Hilltopper Hall, the residence hall that served Western Kentucky University students for about six years before closing due to design and construction flaws in early 2024.

The plaintiff – the WKU Student Life Foundation, a nonprofit that owns and operates residence halls serving WKU students – signed a June 30 joint statement with the two defendants, Sewell & Sewell Architects and Scott, Murphy & Daniel, that SLF expects to settle claims with the engineering firm involved, S.E. Engineering, outside of the lawsuit.

The statement lays out basic case facts: SLF sued Sewell & Sewell Architects in 2024 surrounding project work, and later added the general contractor Scott, Murphy & Daniel. Both have denied the allegations. Then, the statement describes steps for apportioning damages.

The joint statement also describes Donald H. Stoneburg Engineering, doing business as the firm S.E. Engineering, as “the engineer of record for all structural and mechanical engineering services required.” S.E. Engineering had previously been listed on the project. But, according to the attorney representing the Sewell & Sewell Architects, the joint statement clarifies that Sewell & Sewell Architects had provided limited architectural services on the project consistent with its contract with SLF.

“Sewell & Sewell was only hired to provide certain, limited architectural design services on these three projects and certainly was not responsible for the structural designs which have been the source of much criticism on Hilltopper Hall,” stated B. Scott Jones, Sewell & Sewell Architects’ attorney. “Sewell & Sewell has filed a response to this lawsuit and denies that it breached any duties that have contributed to the structural defects with the Building …

“Given (Sewell & Sewell Architect’s) limited role on the project, and the structural design errors and construction errors being alleged,” Jones stated, he “denies that Sewell & Sewell Architects is ‘the primary target’ in this lawsuit.”

In 2008, S.E. Engineering entered an agreement “for Construction Management adviser services, whereby (it) agreed to provide certain professional engineering services to SLF, including structural and mechanical engineering services and construction adviser services,” according to the statement.

The statement adds that S.E. Engineering “served as SLF’s representative on the Project and was responsible for performing certain inspections of work performed on the Project.”

Meanwhile, Sewell & Sewell Architects “agreed to provide architectural services and contract administration services” in accordance with a February 2017 purchase order, according to the joint statement. Scott, Murphy & Daniel in 2016 “agreed to provide certain labor, materials, equipment, and services for construction of the Project,” according to the statement.

SLF expects “to settle its claims” against S.E. Engineering without adding the firm to the lawsuit, according to the joint statement.

Once SLF settles and releases claims against S.E. Engineering, Sewell & Sewell Architects and Scott, Murphy & Daniel may request instruction to apportion liability to S.E. Engineering without adding it to the lawsuit if either of the former two offer sufficient evidence finding S.E. Engineering was partially at fault for damages SLF is seeking to recover in the lawsuit, according to the joint statement.

S.E. Engineering did not respond for comment by press time.

Horowitz reports for the Daily News via a partnership with Report for America.