The statement reads that Dryvit is "disappointed by the decision and intends to vigorously pursue all available remedies through the appellate process." The company states that it firmly believes that the court's decision is flawed in several aspects both from a procedural standpoint as well as under well-established substantive case law in Virginia, and that there are a number of serious errors and omissions in the opinion. Dryvit claims that the evidence introduced at trial does not support all the findings of fact and the company is confident the Appellate Court will remedy the decision under appeal.

The decision, Dryvit continues, is inconsistent with recent decisions made in Virginia in similar construction cases as well as decisions made in similar cases around the country. Dryvit has been successful in securing dismissal in numerous other cases in Virginia and elsewhere prior to this one and did secure dismissal of the Bay Point Condo Association's direct claims against it in this case. In addition, the apportioned responsibility for the alleged damages in this case contrary to the weight of the evidence introduced at trial and without regard tot eh responsibility of the other defendants involved in the actual design and construction of the structure, an unfair ruling, according to Dryvit.

"With thousands of quality buildings across the country clad with Dryvit's Outsulation system and without any issues of water intrusion, we believe this project is not a reflection on the performance of the Outsulation cladding but one that represents the problems caused by poor construction practices and detailing that is critical to the success of any building project," according to the statement.