by Kent Holland | Feb 9, 2011 | Newsletter Article
Where a contractor timely completed a construction contract for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and accepted payment which included changes required by the Corps, the contractor was barred from later filing a claim for additional compensation. The claim was barred...
by Kent Holland | Feb 9, 2011 | Newsletter Article
By Daven G. Lowhurst Thelen Reid & Priest LLP October 3, 2005 The Issue The California Supreme Court has single-handedly altered the contractual expectations of parties to thousands of contracts governed by California law. For many years, parties to a wide variety...
by Kent Holland | Feb 9, 2011 | Newsletter Article
by Michael C. Loulakis Record Steel and Construction v. United States , 62 Fed. Cl. 508 (2004), provides an excellent example of the evolution of design-build caselaw. The dispute in this case involved whether a design-build contract required foundations to be...
by Kent Holland | Feb 9, 2011 | Newsletter Article
Those of you who are interested in design-build have undoubtedly come across Design-Build Lessons Learned, an annual publication authored by Mike Loulakis, the president of the law firm of Wickwire Gavin and one of the country’s foremost authorities on design-build. ...
by Kent Holland | Feb 9, 2011 | Newsletter Article
By: Katz & Stone When claiming entitlement to cost for constructive acceleration, contractors must prove that any time extensions received were inadequate to remedy their excusable delays. Time extensions do not have to be granted immediately, and the mere...
Connect