Emily M. Coffey, Casandra M. Langstaff and J. Daniel Weidner | Koley Jessen What is “Substantial Completion”? In the realm of construction law, the concept of “substantial completion,” also referred to as “substantial performance,” is of critical importance. The point in time at which substantial completion is achieved for a project has a number of… Continue reading What Is “Substantial Completion” and Why Does It Matter?
Tag: Substantial Completion
Nevada’s Common Law Meaning of the Term “Substantial Completion” in the Statute of Repose
William Doerler | The Subrogation Strategist Statutes of repose establish a legislature’s determination of when defendants should be free from liability. As set forth in Nevada Revised Statute (NRS) 11.202, the statute of repose for construction improvements in Nevada is six years after “substantial completion.” In Somersett Owners Ass’n v. Somersett Dev. Co., 492 P.3d 534… Continue reading Nevada’s Common Law Meaning of the Term “Substantial Completion” in the Statute of Repose
Ohio Appellate Court Awards Consequential Damages for Contractor’s Failure to Achieve Substantial Completion Due to Recklessness
Alexandra Parriman | Bricker & Eckler When a contractor indicated indifference to executing a project on schedule and failing to meet the substantial completion date, an Ohio appellate court found that the contractor’s actions constituted recklessness and, based on the terms of the contract, triggered the award of consequential damages. This case arose out of a contract… Continue reading Ohio Appellate Court Awards Consequential Damages for Contractor’s Failure to Achieve Substantial Completion Due to Recklessness
Parties’ Agreement Doesn’t Pull the Trigger on California’s Statute of Repose
William Boerler | The Subrogation Strategist In Hensel Phelps Constr. Co. v. Superior Court, 257 Cal. Rptr. 3d 746 (Cal. Ct. App. 2020), the Court of Appeals of California, Fourth Appellate District, addressed whether a party’s contractual definition of the phrase “substantial completion” controlled the trigger date for California’s construction-related statute of repose, Cal. Civ. Code… Continue reading Parties’ Agreement Doesn’t Pull the Trigger on California’s Statute of Repose
Contract’s Definition of “Substantial Completion” Does Not Apply to Third Party for Purposes of SOL, Holds Court of Appeal
Garret Murai | California Construction Law Blog Those of you in the construction industry know that the two primary statutes of limitation are the 4-year year statute of limitations for patent defects and 10-year statute of limitations for latent defects. Both statutes begin to run on “substantial completion.” In Hensel Phelps Construction Co. v. Superior Court… Continue reading Contract’s Definition of “Substantial Completion” Does Not Apply to Third Party for Purposes of SOL, Holds Court of Appeal