- A1 - Notice of Proposed Termination and An Opportunity to Cure is Implied in Every Contract
- A2 - Subcontractor unreasonably relied on email from Prime that stated only a little rock should be expected – contrary to the Geotech Report that showed the actual hard rock
- A3 - Economic Loss Doctrine Does not Limit Actions where Tangible Property has been Damaged
- A1 - Handwritten Change to the Lien Release was Effective at Preserving Contractor’s Right to Later Make a Claim for More Funds
- A2 - Subcontractor Breached Contract by Refusing to Perform Extra Work as Directed by Contractor unless it First Received Change Order
- A3 - Court Applies Statute of Repose to Dismiss Counts of Complaint for Negligence, Breach of Contract and Indemnification – because Negligence was at Issue in each Count
- A1 - Good Faith and Fair Dealing Duty was Violated by Prime Contractor who Settled Claim with its Client without Including Subcontractor Claim
- A2 - Failure to file Certificate of Merit Requires Case to be Dismissed with Prejudice
- A3 - Subcontractor Breached Contract by Refusing to Perform Extra Work as Directed by Contractor unless it First Received Change Order
- A1 - Register for the Upcoming Webinar on Ethical Challenges for Engineers
- A2 - Court will not litigate case until parties first go through mediation as required by contract
- A3 - Economic Waste Doctrine Might Prevail – but no Summary Judgment Granted
- A4 - Additional Insured Prime Contractor Entitled to be Defended under Subcontractor CGL Policy Where Plaintiff Merely Alleged “Damage to Other Property”
- A1 - Economic Loss Doctrine Applied in Utah to Bar Tort Claim against Real Estate Seller. And Prevailing Party Attorneys Fees Awarded
- A2 - Economic Loss Doctrine Enforced in Arizona to Bar Negligence Action by Project Owner against Engineering Subcontractor
- A3 - Broad Arbitration Clause Flowed Down to Subcontractor Requiring it to Arbitrate Claim against Prime Even though not in Dispute with Owner
Connect