Anti-Indemnity Legislation Is A Growing Trend in Western States

Andrew G. Witik | Litchfield Cavo LLP | March 22, 2018 The growing trend in the Western states of anti-indemnity legislation vis-à-vis construction activities has produced its most recent published and precedential decision in Oklahoma, JP Energy Marketing v. Commerce And Industry Insurance Co., 2018 OK CIV APP 14, 412 P.3d 121 (03/01/2018).  This coverage… Continue reading Anti-Indemnity Legislation Is A Growing Trend in Western States

Construction Defect Claims at Common Interest Developments

Alex M. Chazen and Jason Daniel Feld | Kahana & Feld LLP | March 8, 2018 A homeowners’ association (“HOA”) governing common interest developments is subject to a different set of requirements for construction defect claims as opposed to single-family developments. In 1995, the California legislature enacted the Calderon Act (formerly CA Civil Code §1374) which set… Continue reading Construction Defect Claims at Common Interest Developments

Payment Bond Does Not Cover Claim for Lost Work Opportunity

Stan Martin | Commonsense Construction Law LLC | March 8, 2018 A subcontractor claiming that the general contractor failed to use and pay for a minimum number of workers made a claim against the GC’s payment bond, for the value of the workers not hired. A federal court has held that the Miller Act bond… Continue reading Payment Bond Does Not Cover Claim for Lost Work Opportunity

Claim Handling Requirements by State – Utah

Julitza Perez | Property Insurance Coverage Law Blog | March 14, 2018 Continuing our tour through state-by-state claim handling guidelines, we explore the requirements for the State of Utah. I recently escaped from the Sunshine State (Florida) and visited the State of Utah for the first time. I was amazed by its mountains and had lots… Continue reading Claim Handling Requirements by State – Utah

Judge Salinger: Defendant’s Letter Disputing Existence of Contract Does Not Trigger Start of Statute of Limitations Period for Plaintiff

Matthew P. Ritchie and Natalie M. Cappellazzo | Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP | March 9, 2018 In Bay Colony, Judge Salinger denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss a contract claim as time barred even though one defendant (AMB) had sent a letter to the plaintiffs more than six years earlier disputing the existence of a… Continue reading Judge Salinger: Defendant’s Letter Disputing Existence of Contract Does Not Trigger Start of Statute of Limitations Period for Plaintiff

%d bloggers like this: