Family of man killed in Davenport building collapse sues landlord, city

The family of a man killed in a partial building collapse in downtown Davenport has filed a lawsuit against the landlord, the City of Davenport, and others.

Branden Colvin Sr., Ryan Hitchcock and Daniel Prien were killed May 28 when The Davenport, a six-story apartment building at 324 Main St., partially collapsed.

The estate of Branden Colvin Sr., by its co-administrators and Noah Petersen; Branden Colvin, Jr.; Brittney Colvin; and two minor children listed as the plaintiffs, has filed suit against Andrew World; Davenport Hotel, LLC; Andrew Wold Investments, LLC; Select Structural Engineering, LLC: Bi-State Masonry, Inc.; and the City of Davenport, Scott County Court records show.

At the time of his death, 42-year-old Branden Colvin Sr. was the father of Noah Petersen, 21; Brittney Colvin, 19; Branden Colvin Jr., 18; and two younger children.  

Colvin was in his fifth-floor apartment in The Davenport about 5 p.m. when the building “collapsed due to the failure of a structurally deficient wall that provided crucial support to Branden Colvin Sr.’s apartment,” the suit says. “As a result of the above-referenced collapse, Branden Colvin Sr. was violently swept from his apartment falling with the debris and buried under multiple feet of rubble,” and “remained alive under the rubble, potentially for days, until he later died.”

On Saturday, June 3, his body was found in the rubble, the suit says.

The suit alleges a timeline of complaints and reports that led up to the partial collapse:

On July 19, 2021, the City of Davenport issued a Complaint Notice and Order notifying “the Wold defendants” of structural deterioration and requiring a structural engineering analysis be conducted, according to the suit.

On Sept. 7, 2021, the City of Davenport issued a Final Official Notice notifying the Wold defendants to take action, requiring a structural engineer’s report on the integrity of the building was needed and one was never submitted, the suit alleges.

In early 2023, Select Structural Engineering was retained by the Wold defendants to conduct an emergency evaluation of The Davenport, the suit says.

On or about Feb.  2, Select Structural Engineering issued a report outlining concerns about an area of brick which was cracked and crumbling that needed to be shored with heavy posts so permanent repairs could be completed, the suit shows. The Wold defendants ignored the Feb. 2, 2023, recommendations from Select Structural Engineering, the suit says.

On or about Feb. 2, the City of Davenport issued an Official Notice and Order to the Wold Defendants, declaring The Davenport a public hazard, but allowing continued use of The Davenport as a residence so long as shoring was put up, the suit claims. An engineering report was obtained within 10 days, and scaffolding set up within 24 hours.

On or about Feb. 3, MidAmerican Energy notified The City of Davenport of the unsafe condition of The Davenport structure. After the Feb. 2 and 3 reports, the Wold defendants hired Bi-State Masonry to complete needed structural repairs, the suit shows. The City of Davenport subsequently issued a permit to Davenport Hotels for structural masonry repairs identifying Bi-State Masonry as the contractor. Bi-State Masonry did not install any bracing or shoring to provide structural support to the building, the suit says.

On Feb. 28, Select Structural Engineering sent a letter regarding The Davenport, noting that repairs had been made by Bi-State Masonry, but there remained a large void space between the clay brick façade and the CMU that would soon cause a large panel to collapse creating a safety problem, the suit shows.

On March 1, the City of Davenport’s Chief Building Official visited The Davenport and was informed that Bi-State Masonry had been fired by the Wold defendants because they did not want to pay the contracted price to have repairs completed properly, the suit claims.

After March 1, the Wold defendants reached out to another masonry contractor (R.A. Masonry) to obtain a quote for the proper repairs. R.A. Masonry supplied a $50,000 quote to properly fix the building, which was rejected by the Wold defendants, according to the suit. The Wold Defendants requested a revised/reduced quote that eliminated the shoring and supports for the building, which R.A. Masonry refused stating, “somebody is going to die,” the suit alleges.

In April 2023, a tenant at The Davenport reported to her leasing agent that the wall was bowing, and her window frame was pulling away from the wall and the floor was uneven, observing that the “floor and wall [were] really soft” and stating in an email “I don’t want to fall out the side of the building one day.” The tenant did not receive a satisfying response to her concerns and convinced building management to move her to another apartment building across the street. No other tenants at The Davenport were moved or notified by management of her concerns, the suit says.

On May 24, Select Structural Engineering issued another report regarding The Davenport, stating that there were large patches of brick, including the entire face of the building, ready to fall imminently which could create a safety hazard to cars or passersby, the suit claims. The letter further stated the “brick façade is unlikely to be preserved in place, but it can be brought down in a safe, controlled manner,” and that the interior wall of the downtown Davenport building appeared to be losing stability and is “causing deformation.”

The May 24 letter from Select Structural Engineering’s made no assessment, recommendation, or warning regarding the safety of residents living at The Davenport, the suit says.

Also on May 24, the City of Davenport issued a permit (listing no contractor) to the Wold defendants to replace 100 linear feet of brick exterior and identified the job cost as $3,000., according to the suit.

On May 25, the City of Davenport’s Chief Building official visited The Davenport and confirmed that if immediate action was not taken to evacuate the building, residents would be in danger, yet no such action was taken, the suit alleges.

After the May 25, The City of Davenport Chief Building official erroneously marked the permit as passed noticing the error on May 30 after the building collapsed. In response, the Wold defendants set up two-by-fours to appear as though the requested shoring/anchoring of the building had been done, the suit claims.

On May 26 and May 28, hours before the collapse, R.A. Masonry had visited The Davenport and warned workers to “Get away. You’re going to die,” the suit alleges.

On May 27, one day before the collapse, a 911 caller told a dispatcher that part of a wall at the building was “bulging out,” the suit shows.

On the afternoon of May 28, according to the suit, a man who works with a nonprofit that focuses on improving the city’s central business district called 911 and relayed what he said he’d learned from one of his workers about the wall, reporting: “One of my guys is working. He was cleaning up in the back parking lot and said that the wall is bulging out. It’s been under repair. Someone is there working on it and told him to get out of the way because it’s not looking good.”

On or about May 28, “it became evident that the Wold defendants were removing bricks from the building without providing necessary support and bracing,” the suit alleges.

“As a result of the horrific and catastrophic collapse of The Davenport, Branden Colvin Sr. was caused to undergo severe conscious mental and physical pain and suffering prior to his death. As a result of Branden Colvin Sr.’s death, the Estate of Branden Colvin Sr. has prematurely incurred funeral and burial expenses and is entitled to interest on such expenses” and “has been deprived of the accumulations reasonably to have been expected had he lived to his normal life expectancy.”

His children, the suit says, “have each suffered the loss of his care, society, services, companionship, contributions, consortium, and support of their father. “

The suit says “Noah Petersen, Brittney Colvin, Branden Colvin Junior (and the younger children) each bore witness to the aftermath and ongoing catastrophic result of The Davenport collapse, not knowing whether Branden Colvin Sr. was dead or alive in the rubble of the building and waiting in anguish for 6 days for any information regarding his whereabouts, well-being and disposition, and each has suffered in the past and will in the future suffer severe emotional distress as a result.”

The family asks for a judgment that will “fully and fairly compensate them for their damages,” and for “punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish and deter others from committing acts and omissions similar to those committed by the defendants as described herein.” They ask for a jury trial.