- A1 - Liquidated Damages Enforced Against Road Re-Striping Contractor on Federal Highway Project
- A2 - Subcontractor Barred from Appealing Federal Government Decision on a Prime Contract Dispute Even though it was 3rd Party Beneficiary
- A3 - Expert Witness Adequately Testified to Consensus Opinion on Applicable Standard of Care
- A4 - Limitation of Liability Clause in Engineer’s Contract Enforced in Georgia
- A5 - Contractor Entitled to Equitable Adjustment on Navy Contract for Constructive Change that Resulted from Navy’s Interpretation of Ambiguous Specification
- A6 - Bodily Injuries and Property Damage from Garage Collapse are Excluded from Coverage under Design Professional’s CGL Policy
- A1 - Construction Manager is Immune from a Contractor’s Employee Personal Injury Suit pursuant to the Workers Compensation Statute
- A2 - Arizona Supreme Court Reaffirms Economic Loss Doctrine
- A3 - Design Professionals Should not Agree to Defend Clients
- A4 - $26.9 Million in Liquidated Damages Not a Windfall to Power Plant Owner
- A1 - Consultant’s Duty to Defend Under a Contract with Developer Arises At the Time of Tender Despite the Lack of a Finding of Negligence Against the Consultant
- A2 - Contractor Can Sue Architect on Quantum Meruit Basis Where no Contract Exists
- A3 - Statute of Limitations for Negligence Actions Bars Suit against Engineer that was based on Breach of Contract Allegations
- A4 - When Does a Notice from Client Become a Claim that Must be Reported to Insurance Carrier?
- A5 - Economic Loss Doctrine in Pennsylvania Bars Owner’s Negligence Claim against Designers and Construction Subcontractors
- A1 - Case against Engineer Dismissed for Lack of Expert Affidavit
- A2 - Firm not Subject to Suit in New York for Services Performed by Moonlighting Employee in New Jersey
- A3 - Date of Substantial Completion Triggers Statute of Limitations period for Prime Contractor to Sue its Subcontractor
- A4 - No Coverage in Homeowner’s Policy for Mold Damage from Water Pipe Leak
- A5 - Insurer and Environmental Consultant Have No Duty to Warn of Mold
- A6 - Economic Loss Doctrine did not Preclude Developer’s Negligence Action against Engineer
Connect