184 results for 'cat:"Construction" AND cat:"Contract"'.
J. Wise finds the filing court properly sua sponte transferred the HVAC company's complaint to another county. Although the contract was signed in the filing court's county, the home on which the work was performed was located in the county of the eventual trial court, which rendered it the proper venue. Meanwhile, the trial court properly denied the HVAC company's request for damages related to excess charges not paid by the homeowners because the work involved with those charges was never included in the original scope of work and was added without the homeowners' consent. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Wise, Filed On: January 12, 2024, Case #: 2024-Ohio-109, Categories: construction, Venue, contract
J. Fisher finds that the lower court properly found for a paving subcontractor that worked on a project to construct a municipal airport taxiway because the contract unambiguously set the price at the prevailing wage at the time of paving, and thus an impermissible escalation had not occurred when the work invoice increased. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Fisher, Filed On: January 11, 2024, Case #: CV-22-2007, Categories: construction, contract
J. Gonzalez finds that the lower court improperly ruled in a dispute over a labor and materials lien. A subcontractor claims it was not paid for the work it completed, leaving it to file a labor lien for labor without giving a pre-lien notice. This gives rise to the question of whether a pre-lien notice is required for labor liens under state law. Under the plain language of the statute and history from the legislature, a pre-lien notice is not required for cases such as this. Reversed.
Court: Washington Supreme Court, Judge: Gonzalez, Filed On: January 11, 2024, Case #: 101591-7, Categories: construction, contract
J. Reidinger grants an insurance company’s motion for summary judgment after a bridge construction corporation counter-sued it for breach of contract. The insurer issued bonds to cover a number of the corporation’s construction projects, and the two parties entered into an indemnity agreement. A year later, the insurance company received claims against the bonds for breach of contract. The corporation admitted it could not complete the contracts and needed a $1.5 million advance. The company agreed under certain conditions, but the corporation never agreed to those, and the company never disbursed the money. The corporation argues that the company was obligated to pay it the full $1.5 million, but the company’s conditions were already part of the indemnity agreement, so this argument fails.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Reidinger, Filed On: January 10, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv24, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: construction, Insurance, contract
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Doughty grants a general contractor’s request and dismisses a shopping center’s breach of contract claim, arising from a contract dispute over $586,000 worth of storm-related roofing repairs. The shopping plaza is ordered to amend its complaint to address deficiencies in a related fraud claim against the roofer. It is self-evident that anything the plaza could get by prevailing on a declaratory judgment claim could not be obtained via the breach of contract claim. Furthermore, there is a likelihood of overlap between its declaratory judgment and fraud claims.
Court: USDC Western District of Louisiana , Judge: Doughty, Filed On: January 8, 2024, Case #: 5:23cv1191, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: construction, Fraud, contract
[Consolidated.] J. Boulware Eurie finds that the trial court was right to conclude that a staffing company hired by a subcontractor on public works projects was not a "laborer" under the mechanics' lien law since it was acting as an employer that bestowed labor on a work of improvement. Also, the prevailing parties were properly awarded attorney fees because the mechanics' lien law governs the payment bonds that were issued on the projects. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Boulwarie Eurie, Filed On: January 2, 2024, Case #: C096705, Categories: construction, contract
J. Tenney holds that a contractor's preliminary lien notice was not timely but the trial court must determine the value of work it performed after the notice, which may support a claim under the savings statute. On remand, the trial court may consider the lien, as well as any related contract claims, in determining the prevailing party for any attorney fee award, and it should use the flexible and reasoned approach. Reversed in part.
Court: Utah Court Of Appeals, Judge: Tenney, Filed On: December 29, 2023, Case #: 20210847-CA, Categories: construction, Attorney Fees, contract
J. Mcilmail denies, in part, the government's motion to dismiss the contractor's claim. Although the board lacks jurisdiction over the contractor's claim for government-caused project delay and for more than $1 million in damages, it does have jurisdiction over its challenge to the government's termination of its contract by default.
Court: Armed Services Board Of Contract Appeals, Judge: Mcilmail , Filed On: December 21, 2023, Case #: 63461, Categories: construction, Government, contract
[Consolidated] J. McLish denies the government's motion to dismiss the contractor's appeals on behalf of its subcontractors. The subcontractors say work on the construction of a building for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency in St. Louis was hindered and delayed by government responses to Covid-19, as well as cost increases. The complaint adequately asserts constructive changes entitling the contractors to equitable adjustment pursuant to the contract's “Changes” clause, constructive suspensions of work and breaches of the government’s implied duties.
Court: Armed Services Board Of Contract Appeals, Judge: McLish , Filed On: December 20, 2023, Case #: 63571, Categories: construction, Government, contract
J. Boardman denies a subcontractor’s motion to dismiss a surety’s third-party complaint in this Miller Act claim for contractual indemnification as unripe. Under the indemnification agreement liability cannot be transferred to subcontractor to enforce the Miller Act and the prevention doctrine is considered a non sequitur. The court cannot determine at this stage if the claims in fact are covered by the indemnification agreements.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Boardman, Filed On: December 20, 2023, Case #: 8:22cv2789, NOS: Miller Act - Contract, Categories: construction, Indemnification, contract
J. Boardman grants a general contractor’s motion to dismiss a subcontractor’s counterclaim in this Miller Act dispute claiming a breach of subcontract for not paying under the agreement. The general contractor alleges damages for delay, base contract work and change in work per the contract. The subcontractor fails to prove or allege that the contract was satisfied. The subcontractor fails to offer any request or a proper memorandum to support their motion. Therefore, the motion to dismiss the general contractor’s crossclaims is denied.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Boardman, Filed On: December 20, 2023, Case #: 8:22cv2789, NOS: Miller Act - Contract, Categories: construction, contract
J. Wray finds that because New Mexico law prioritizes an insurer's duty to defend over potential contract defenses, including an insured's failure to provide proper notice, the lower court erroneously granted the insurance companies' motion for summary judgment on claims filed by the subdivision developer. Although the developer waited several years after the first claims of structural defects to file its claim with the insurers, factual disputes regarding whether the insurers have a duty to defend precluded the court from granting summary judgment on the issue of notice. Reversed in part.
Court: New Mexico Court of Appeals, Judge: Wray, Filed On: December 19, 2023, Case #: A-1-CA-39929, Categories: construction, Insurance, contract
J. Bevan finds the district court improperly released the mechanic’s lien bond. The construction company filed the bond for release from a lien imposed by the rental company for failure to pay for equipment. The lien release bond was substitute security in a contest of priority over the lien rights of the interested parties and was not associated with the personal rights of the parties against the bond itself. Reversed and vacated.
Court: Idaho Supreme Court, Judge: Bevan , Filed On: December 18, 2023, Case #: 49708, Categories: construction, contract
J. Shubb denies, in part, Subaru’s motion to dismiss an automotive group’s claims arising from a dispute regarding the construction of a dealership. The group has sufficiently pleaded its contract claim related to Subaru's call on a letter of credit.
Court: USDC Eastern District of California, Judge: Shubb, Filed On: December 15, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv997, NOS: Contract Product Liability - Contract, Categories: construction, Vehicle, contract
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court improperly granted one set of defendants' motion for another set of defendants' to admit certain facts regarding the purchase of construction materials. The notice to admit was "palpably improper" because it sought concessions that go to the heart of the controversy. Reversed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: December 13, 2023, Case #: 06346, Categories: construction, contract
J. Stark finds that the court of federal claims properly found for the U.S. in claims stemming from the construction of a new aircraft carrier maintenance pier because the contractor failed to demonstrate entitlement to recover additional compensation due to site conditions. Affirmed.
Court: Federal Circuit, Judge: Stark, Filed On: December 11, 2023, Case #: 2022-1740, Categories: construction, contract
Per curiam. The appeals court finds a lower court improperly ruled that an insurance company was financially obligated to cover costs of a bridge collapse. A construction company argued that the insurance company agreed to split the costs of damages with its professional- liability insurer. However, the insurance company sufficiently showed in court that the company's coverage excluded accidents in connection to "construction management" and "professional liability." Reversed.
Court: 8th Circuit, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: December 5, 2023, Case #: 22-3301, Categories: construction, Insurance, contract
J. Brown denies requests by a general contractor and its surety to dismiss a subcontractor’s Miller Act claim totaling $1.1 million for work allegedly performed on a federal construction project in New Orleans on grounds the subcontractor’s claims are subject to arbitration. Citing Fifth Circuit precedent, the ruling rejects dismissal of the federal suit as both inimical to the law giving a subcontractor the right to sue a surety issuing a bond to a general contractor and as a hindrance to litigants from arbitrating their disputes. Therefore, the subcontractor’s federal Miller Act claims against the surety are stayed, pending arbitration of the subcontractor’s state law claims against the general contractor.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Louisiana , Judge: Brown, Filed On: December 1, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv2119, NOS: Miller Act - Contract, Categories: Arbitration, construction, contract
J. Russell affirms the commission's decision to dismiss the network provider's petition for a declaratory judgment for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The provider sought compensation from a private construction company that worked with the Virginia Department of Transportation's expansion of a road that required the relocation of four of the provider's facilities located in public rights-of-way. The origin of this claim is the contract between the provider and VDOT, which the commission and court are barred from reviewing.
Court: Virginia Supreme Court, Judge: Russle, Filed On: November 30, 2023, Case #: 230400 , Categories: construction, Agency, contract
J. Theis finds that the appeals court properly found that the insurer has a duty to defend its additional insured under a subcontractor's commercial general liability policy in a suit stemming from alleged construction defects in a townhome development. The insurer cannot bar coverage of all construction defects as "accidental," as that would make the policy's business risk exclusions meaningless. The allegations in the complaint are sufficient to establish an initial grant of coverage, leaving the court to fully determine whether the specific defects are afforded coverage under the policy. Affirmed.
Court: Illinois Supreme Court, Judge: Theis, Filed On: November 30, 2023, Case #: 129087, Categories: construction, Insurance, Interference With contract
J. Moeller finds that the trial court properly entered a default award in favor of homebuyers who sued a builder for construction defects and other causes. But the homebuyers did not plead a specific damages amount in their complaint and the trial court failed to support its award with sufficient evidence, so the builder's challenge to the amount may proceed. Vacated in part.
Court: Idaho Supreme Court, Judge: Moeller, Filed On: November 28, 2023, Case #: 48954, Categories: construction, Damages, contract
J. Connor finds the lower court properly dismissed a homeowners’ association’s breach of contract claim. The property owners planned to build a home and believed the property was overseen by the homeowners’ association. After the homeowners’ association’s architectural committee denied their building plans, an attorney was consulted and found the subject property was not governed by any homeowners’ association. The homeowners’ association argued the property is subject to the restrictive covenants of the homeowners' association, and the owners were in breach of contract by failing to obtain their approval for construction. The owners argued the homeowners’ association had no standing as it held no authority over their property, and the lower court agreed; as such, the lower court properly dismissed the claim for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Connor, Filed On: November 22, 2023, Case #: 3-22-00321-CV, Categories: construction, Jurisdiction, contract