Kevin Pollack | Property Insurance Coverage Law Blog | June 28, 2016 On June 9, 2016, The Washington Supreme Court held that an Essex Insurance Company property policy immediately cut off coverage for water damage after an insured property became vacant.1 In Lui, the policyholders owned a commercial building that sustained water damage after a pipe burst while… Continue reading Court Finds No Coverage for Water Damage Loss Where Property Had Been Vacant for Less than 1 Month
Month: June 2016
“Occurrence” May Include Intentional Acts In Montana
Tred R. Eyerly | Insurance Law Hawaii | June 15, 2016 The Montana Supreme Court found that policy language defining “accidents may include intentional acts.” Employers Mut. Cas. Co. v. Fisher Builders, Inc., 2016 Mont. LEXIS 269 (Mont. Sup. Ct. April 19, 2016). Jerry and Karen Slack hired Fisher Builders to build a remodeled home located… Continue reading “Occurrence” May Include Intentional Acts In Montana
How to Circumvent “No Damage for Delay” Clauses
J.P. Vogel | Texas Construction Law Blog | June 21, 2016 Most commercial construction contracts contain a “No Damage For Delay” Clause and most contractors mistakenly believe they are Kings X for any potential claims related to delay caused by an owner or original contractor. While nearly every commercial construction contract contains the same or… Continue reading How to Circumvent “No Damage for Delay” Clauses
Oregon Negligent Construction Defect Claims Subject to 2-Year Statute of Limitations
Kevin Clonts | Rizzo Mattingly Bosworth PC | June 2016 On June 16, 2016, the Oregon Supreme Court issued an opinion holding that a two-year statute of limitations applies to negligent construction defect claims, subject to a discovery rule. In Oregon, negligent construction defect claims must therefore be brought within two years of when plaintiff… Continue reading Oregon Negligent Construction Defect Claims Subject to 2-Year Statute of Limitations
Pair of Cases Concerning Pay-if-Paid Provisions
Katherine E. Kohm | The Dispute Resolver | June 23, 2016 Within the last month, two decisions with two outcomes were issued concerning “pay-if-paid” provisions. Observe that a “pay-if-paid” provision is a true condition precedent in that a general contractor is not required to pay its subcontractor unless and until it receives payment from the owner. A different result flows… Continue reading Pair of Cases Concerning Pay-if-Paid Provisions