Matthew DeVries | Best Practices Construction Law In a groundbreaking move aimed at fostering fair competition and empowering workers, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued a final rule last week to ban noncompete agreements nationwide. This ruling may carry profound implications for the construction industry, prompting construction businesses to reassess their practices and ensure compliance while… Continue reading Blueprint for Change: How the Construction Industry Should Respond to the FTC’s Ban on Noncompetes
Month: May 2024
A Guide to California’s Changes to Civil Discovery Rules
Amy Frerich and Michael Fullam | Lewis Brisbois California legislators have changed the rules of discovery in civil cases through the passage of amendments to Code of Civil Procedure sections 2016.090 and 2023.050, effective January 1, 2024. Section 2016.090 creates a new set of rules for civil litigators in cases filed on or after January… Continue reading A Guide to California’s Changes to Civil Discovery Rules
When OSHA Cites You
Michael Metz-Topodas | Construction Executive The best defense against an OSHA citation is just that: a good defense. Make sure your safety program has you prepared to respond—and keeps you from getting complacent about your workers’ safety. With the strong bonds that form among construction project teams, workers looking out for each other helps keep… Continue reading When OSHA Cites You
Federal Court Reiterates Broad Duty to Defend in Additional Insured Cases
Craig Rokuson | Traub Lieberman In the recent case of Travelers Indem. Co. of Am. v. Accredited Sur. & Cas. Co., No. 21-CV-7189 (FB) (JRC), 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44634 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 13, 2024), the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of New York had occasion to consider an additional insured tender on behalf of… Continue reading Federal Court Reiterates Broad Duty to Defend in Additional Insured Cases
A Termination for Convenience is not a Termination for Default
David Adelstein | Florida Construction Law Updates A termination for convenience is NOT a termination for default. They are NOT the same. They should NOT be treated as the same. I am a huge proponent of termination for convenience provisions because sometimes a party needs to be able to exercise a termination for convenience, but… Continue reading A Termination for Convenience is not a Termination for Default