- A1 - Payment Provision Concerns in Design and Construction Contracts Video
- A2 - Managing Risks of Payment Provisions in Design and Construction Contracts
- A3 - Plaintiff Failed to Admit Requests for Admissions – and Defendant who won at Trial was entitled to Recover Attorneys’ Fees
- A4 - Insufficient Basis to Pierce Corporate Veil
- A1 - Spoliation of Evidence (homeowner tore down retaining walls)
- A2 - Oral Contract did not Include Indemnification and Additional Insured Obligations
- A1 - Limitation of Liability Clause Ambiguous in Engineering Agreement
- A2 - Contract Deemed Express Contract Despite Contractor Failing to Sign It
- A1 - Contract Drafting Tip: The Flow–Down Incorporation by Reference Clause
- A2 - Implied Warranty and Workmanship Claims Cannot be Waived by Homeowner
- A3 - Engineer has no Exemption from Liability under Statute Providing Insurance Companies Exemption from Liability
- A4 - Arbitration Award Affirmed Despite Objections that one of Arbitrators Failed to Disclose Relationship with Two of the Parties
- A1 - A Demand Letter to an Insured Architect and Others was not Deemed to be “Claim” that had to be Reported to the Professional Insurance Carrier
- A2 - Insurance Carrier could not assert the Contractual Liability Exclusion to Deny Coverage for Breach of Contract Claim that arose out of Negligence
- A3 - Parties Waived their Contractual Rights to Arbitrate
- A1 - Indemnification - Negotiating a Reasonable Clause
- A2 - Individual Doing Business as a corporate name Held Individually Liable
- A3 - Liquidated Damages Are Restricted When Contractor Completed Major Two Phases of Three- Phase Government Project
- A4 - Default Termination was Improper and was Converted to Termination for Convenience
- A1 - Shifting Liability from Contractor to Owner: Texas Finally Joins the Rest of the Nation on Defective Plans & Specs
- A2 - Indemnification: Contractor’s Employee not an “Agent” entitled to Indemnification
- A3 - Summary Judgment where Insufficient Expert Testimony to Prove Negligence
- A1 - Be Careful about Responsibility for Defective Cost Estimates in Current Environment of Price Spikes and Supply Shortages
- A2 - Economic Loss Doctrine Inapplicable to Condo HOA suit
- A3 - No Insurance under CGL Policy for Contractual Dispute
- A1 - Subcontractor Entitled to Recover Costs of Removing Asphalt Pavement instead of Limited Amount of Concrete Pavement as Specified
- A2 - Contractor Cannot make Performance Bond Claim when it Failed to Terminate its Subcontractor
- A3 - Contractor had no Professional Liability Coverage under CGL Policy
- A1 - Indemnification Unenforceable against Design Firm by Construction Contractor
- A2 - Individual was not an “Agent” entitled to Indemnification
- A3 - Economic Loss Doctrine Bars Suit by Developer against a Subcontractor
Connect