Katharine E. Kohm | The Dispute Resolver A statute of repose bars claims against a defendant for a given period of time after completion of project. These statutes are stronger than statutes of limitation because tolling is not permitted. Clients including architects, engineers, builders, and contractors should understand their state’s statute of repose to effectively… Continue reading Recent Decisions Clarify Statute of Repose
Month: February 2020
Binding Arbitration Award In Coverage Dispute Ends Later Coverage Litigation
Larry P. Schiffer | Squire Patton Boggs Many insurance policies have binding arbitration clauses along with other provisions that address whether a lawsuit may be brought against the insurance company. What happens when the arbitration goes against the policyholder? Can the policyholder then sue the insurance company over the same coverage dispute even if the… Continue reading Binding Arbitration Award In Coverage Dispute Ends Later Coverage Litigation
Does a No-Damage-for-Delay Clause Also Preclude Acceleration Damages?
Ted R. Gropman and Christine Z. Fan | ConsensusDocs Construction contracts often include a “no damage for delay” clause that denies a contractor the right to recover delay-related costs and limits the contractor’s remedy to an extension of time for noncontractor-caused delays to a project’s completion date. Depending on the nature of the delay and… Continue reading Does a No-Damage-for-Delay Clause Also Preclude Acceleration Damages?
Tennessee Looks to Define Improvements to Real Property
Lian Skaf | The Subrogation Strategist For subrogation practitioners dealing with an installation-based statute of repose, knowing what is an improvement to real property is the first battle in what can, but does not have to be, a long fight. Like many other states, Tennessee’s statute of repose bars claims based on improvements to real… Continue reading Tennessee Looks to Define Improvements to Real Property
Duty to Defend Broadly Applies to Entire Action; Insured Need Not Apportion Defense Costs, Says Maryland Appeals Court
Michael S. Levine and Kevin V. Small | Hunton Insurance Recovery Blog In a recent decision, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals reiterated that the duty to defend broadly requires a liability insurer to defend an entire lawsuit against its insured, even where only some of the allegations are potentially covered. The court further held… Continue reading Duty to Defend Broadly Applies to Entire Action; Insured Need Not Apportion Defense Costs, Says Maryland Appeals Court