## Facts

- Trinity Church, a historic stone-masonry church in Boston, stood adjacent to the John Hancock Tower construction site.
- During excavation for the tower, the excavation system failed and undermined the church’s foundation.
- Ground movement caused the church’s foundation to settle unevenly and shift horizontally toward the excavation.
- The movement produced extensive cracking through the church’s masonry walls, impairing structural integrity.
- Trinity sought interior, exterior, and structural damages; the appeal addressed only structural damages (long-term injury to load-bearing elements and foundation).
- Trinity sued John Hancock (the developer) and multiple entities involved in construction; excavation-related claims against certain defendants were tried separately from other claims.

## Issues

1. What measure of damages applies to structural injury to a special-purpose property with no readily ascertainable market value, and whether damages may be calculated as a percentage of the present estimated cost to dismantle and reconstruct the building.
2. Whether the structural damages award required discounting to present value because physical repair would occur in the future.
3. Whether an insurer’s counsel’s statement that the insurer “defends all parties” could support a finding that the statute of limitations was waived for multiple defendants.

## Decision

- The court affirmed the judgment against John Hancock, including the structural damages award.
- The court held it was reasonable for the jury to quantify structural damages as a percentage of the present estimated cost of dismantling and reconstructing the church, based on evidence measuring incremental damage against an ultimate “takedown” condition.
- The court upheld the exclusion of present-value evidence and instructions because Trinity’s proof aimed to place a present dollar value on damage already suffered, not to recover future expenditures.
- The court affirmed directed verdicts for seven other excavation-related defendants because the claims were time-barred and the evidence did not support a waiver of the statute of limitations as to them.

## Legal Principles

- When diminution in market value is not ascertainable, property damages may be measured by the reasonable cost of replacement or reconstruction.
- For special-purpose property lacking a meaningful market value, reconstruction-cost-based methods may be used to express present structural injury, including use of a percentage-of-reconstruction-cost approach when supported by evidence.
- A damages award that values present injury in current dollars is not treated as “future damages” requiring discounting merely because repairs may be deferred.
- Statute-of-limitations waiver requires evidence of an authorized waiver extending to the specific defendant; generalized statements about defense arrangements are insufficient.

## Conclusion

The court approved a reconstruction-cost-based method for valuing present structural damage to a unique historic property, rejected present-value discounting where the award reflected current valuation of existing harm, and enforced limitations defenses absent proof of a defendant-specific waiver.


Trinity Church in the City of Boston v. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co., 399 Mass. 43, 502 N.E.2d 532 (1987)