Rachel B. Greenlee | Lane Powell | April 3, 2018 In an unpublished opinion filed April 3, 2018, in HNS, Inc. v. Eagle Rock Quarry, et al., Cause No. 34695-1-III, Division Three of the Washington Court of Appeals dismissed a contractor collection action finding that the contractor failed to substantially comply with the requirements of Washington’s contractor… Continue reading Washington Court of Appeals Dismisses Oregon Contractor’s Collection Action for Failure to Strictly Comply With Registration Requirements
Month: April 2018
Don’t Assume A Design Role Unless You’re The Designer
George M. Nicholos | Vandeventer Black LLP | April 4, 2018 Recent weather conditions highlight the importance of avoiding unintentional design responsibility. This first quarter of 2018 has seen persistent periods of wind-driven rain; which often expose building envelope weaknesses. Uncontrolled rainwater penetration, condensation, and moisture related damage commonly result and threaten both structural integrity… Continue reading Don’t Assume A Design Role Unless You’re The Designer
An Exception to an Exclusion: Always Read the Policy
J. Ryan Fowler | Property Insurance Coverage Law Blog | April 9, 2018 I commonly get asked coverage questions that relate to a commercial client’s claim for damages. My response is always the same, “send me the policy and I will take a look.” I know this sounds obvious but with the multitude of policies… Continue reading An Exception to an Exclusion: Always Read the Policy
Unfortunate (and Unexpected) Restriction on Additional Insured Status
Stan Martin | Commonsense Construction Law LLC | March 28, 2018 The New York Court of Appeals, in a split decision, has focused on one word in deciding that a owner’s construction manager was not entitled to additional insured status on the general contractor’s policy. The contract required the GC to include the owner, DASNY,… Continue reading Unfortunate (and Unexpected) Restriction on Additional Insured Status
No Coverage for Property that was not Insured’s “Primary Residence” as Described Under the Policy
Marie Laur | Property Insurance Coverage Law Blog | April 8, 2018 A Maryland court recently ruled there was no insurance coverage available to an insured for a loss to her property that was not her primary residence. In the case Liberty Insurance Corp. v. Barnes,1 the district court ruled that the clear language of the policy… Continue reading No Coverage for Property that was not Insured’s “Primary Residence” as Described Under the Policy