Indemnification Clause Unenforceable where Inconsistent with a State’s Contribution Act Applicable to Joint Tortfeasors

by Kent Holland | Aug 28, 2017 | indemnification clause, Newsletter Article

By: Kent Holland A contract required the architect to indemnify its project owner client (a hotel) against damages and attorneys fees arising from injuries on hotel property. The hotel, architect and others entered into settlement agreements with a plaintiff that...

Arbitration or Jury Trial- Which is the better choice for A/E’s?

by Kent Holland | Aug 28, 2017 | Newsletter Article

By: Steve Whitehorn Whitehorn Financial Group, Inc One big question my architect and engineer clients ask me often : “When I sign a contract, is it better to choose arbitration or jury trial, in the event we need to resolve a dispute?” This is an important topic. It’s...

Indemnification and Defense Obligation Applied to Owner’s First-Party Claim to Require Engineer to Defend Owner Against Run of the Mill Contractor Claim

by Kent Holland | Jul 26, 2017 | Newsletter Article

By: J. Kent Holland, Jr. A recent court decision requiring an engineer to indemnify and defend its client, a project owner, against a routine contractor claim is a wakeup call to further clamp down on indemnification language so that only those damages resulting from...

Court Affirms that Indemnification Clauses Traditionally Used and Interpreted as Extending Only to Third-Party Claims – Cannot be Used for First Party Damages from Breach of Contract

by Kent Holland | Jul 26, 2017 | indemnification clause, Newsletter Article

By: J. Kent Holland, Jr. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia affirmed a U.S. District Court decision that granted summary judgment to an engineer, holding that the statute of limitations had run on a breach of contract action, and the...

Government Can’t Use Contract’s General Disclaimer of Reliance on Site Information to Deny Differing Site Condition Claim (Metcalf v. U.S. precedent)

by Kent Holland | Jul 26, 2017 | differing site conditions, Newsletter Article

By: J. kent Holland, Jr. The U.S. Army denied a differing site condition claim of its contract that allegedly encountered subsurface rock conditions as well as ground water conditions, differing materially from what was represented in a geotechnical report provided to...

Essential to Engage Your Insurance Broker to Review Additional Insured Endorsement Requirements in Contracts

by Kent Holland | Jul 26, 2017 | Newsletter Article

By: Michael Herlihy, ARM, CRIS – Ames & Gough As discussed in the April, May and June editions of Construction Risk.com Reporter, the New York Supreme Court ruling in Gilbane Building Co./TDS Construction Corp. vs. St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance/Liberty...