Matthew H. Mues | Davis Wright Tremaine On September 13, 2023, the Oregon Court of Appeals (“Court”) addressed several arguments made by an insurer, Arrowood Indemnity Company (“Arrowood”), as to why it did not have a duty to defend, or why it should only defend covered claims, in environmental litigation involving the Portland Harbor Superfund… Continue reading Oregon Court of Appeals Addresses an Insurer’s Duty to Defend and Affirms “Complete Defense” Rule
Month: October 2023
Construction Litigation Roundup: “No Good – Just the Bad and the Ugly”
Daniel Lund III | Phelps Dunbar A general contractor on a federal highway project in Arizona refused to pay in excess of $800,000 to its site preparation subcontractor. The sub filed suit in federal court against the GC and its Miller Act surety. After being served with the suit, the general contractor and surety –… Continue reading Construction Litigation Roundup: “No Good – Just the Bad and the Ugly”
Construction Litigation Roundup: “I’m Still Standing”
Daniel Lund III | Phelps Dunbar A defaulted general contractor advancing a wrongful termination argument against the project owner found itself faced with an argument that the contractor had no rights remaining against the owner. At issue was the series of transactions leading to the takeover by the surety of a Hartford, Connecticut, baseball stadium… Continue reading Construction Litigation Roundup: “I’m Still Standing”
Signatures Really are Binding – Even if the Signatory Doesn’t Understand the Contract
Shepard Davidson | Burns & Levinson Most people expect that by signing a contract they are going to be bound by it absent special circumstances. But do situations where the signatory is unsophisticated and/or doesn’t even speak the language in which the contract is written qualify as such special circumstances? As the Massachusetts Appeals Court… Continue reading Signatures Really are Binding – Even if the Signatory Doesn’t Understand the Contract
Approaching Design-Build Projects to Avoid (or Win) Disputes
Stuart Eisler | Construction Executive Stakeholders engage in design-build projects believing the collaborative nature better aligns parties’ interests and reduces overall risk exposure. Each of the lead parties bases this belief on different factors—the owner sees an opportunity to reduce change-order exposure and improve delivery times, the design-builder (or contractor) aims to control design volatility… Continue reading Approaching Design-Build Projects to Avoid (or Win) Disputes