- A1 - Indemnification Unenforceable against Design Firm by Construction Contractor
- A2 - Individual was not an “Agent” entitled to Indemnification
- A3 - Economic Loss Doctrine Bars Suit by Developer against a Subcontractor
- A1 - Pay-if-paid Provisions Not Per Se Unenforceable in Nevada
- A2 - Contractor Entitled to Recover Delay Damages including Overhead Costs
- A3 - Insurance Carrier Was Correctly Dismissed from Litigation Against Engineer
- A1 - Brand Name or Equal Specification Makes Contractor Responsible for Design Changes Necessary for use of the Or Equal
- A2 - Road Construction Contractor Owed Duty of Care to Motorist
- A1 - Government Contractor Entitled to Time Extension (but not Costs) Caused by Pandemic Delay to Project
- A2 - Upcoming Webinar Provides Insights from Leading Construction General Counsel
- A3 - Design Professional Contracts: 1 Minute Construction Risk Management Video Series
- A4 - General Contractor Allowed to Bring Third Party Claim against Architect for Defective Specifications
- A1 - Dispute under Design-Build Teaming Agreement and Subcontract may be Subject to Arbitration even if Statute of Limitations has Lapsed
- A2 - Economic Loss Doctrine Applied to Dismiss Homeowner Suit against Geotechnical Firm that Issued Soils Report to Developer
- A3 - Fraud Claims against Engineer Dismissed for Lack of Specificity
Connect