Creighton Dixon | Snell & Wilmer The Arizona Court of Appeals recently published a decision examining the Registrar of Contractor’s (“ROC”) handling of a homeowner’s claim involving the Residential Contractors’ Recovery Fund (the “Fund”). The decision, Gordon v. Arizona Registrar of Contractors, 247 Ariz. 146 (App. 2019), is a helpful reminder that while the ROC and… Continue reading The Registrar of Contractors and the Residential Contractors’ Recovery Fund: One Size Does Not Fit All
Month: January 2020
Not All Damages Are Created Equal – the Proper Application of the Economic Loss Doctrine
Rahul Gogineni | The Subrogation Strategist In William Lansing v. Doe, 2019 Ore. App. LEXIS 1564, the Court of Appeals of Oregon considered whether the Economic Loss Doctrine (ELD) applied to the plaintiff’s claims based on purportedly faulty construction work in a home. In determining that damage to persons or property is not a purely economic loss… Continue reading Not All Damages Are Created Equal – the Proper Application of the Economic Loss Doctrine
Killer Subcontract Provisions
Patrick McNamara | Porter Law Group We are frequently requested by subcontractor clients to review the subcontract that has been prepared by the prime contractor, before our client signs it. While no two agreements are identical, there are a number of problematic contract provisions that appear in many agreements. Here is a list of ten… Continue reading Killer Subcontract Provisions
Construction Change Order: Friend or Foe
George Nicholos | Vandeventer Black The dreaded Change Order or CO is almost unavoidable on most projects. COs commonly result because of things such as inaccurate specifications, ambiguous or inaccurate drawings, unforeseen conditions at a job site, issues with construction materials, faulty budgets or schedules, or additional requests or changes by an owner. CO logistics… Continue reading Construction Change Order: Friend or Foe
Serving Notice of Nonpayment Under Miller Act
David Adelstein | Florida Construction Legal Updates Under the federal Miller Act, if a claimant is NOT in privity with the prime contractor, it needs to serve a “notice of nonpayment” within 90 days of its final furnishing. In this manner, 40 U.S.C. 3133 (b)(2) states: A person having a direct contractual relationship with a… Continue reading Serving Notice of Nonpayment Under Miller Act