- A1 - Good Faith and Fair Dealing Duty was Violated by Prime Contractor who Settled Claim with its Client without Including Subcontractor Claim
- A2 - Failure to file Certificate of Merit Requires Case to be Dismissed with Prejudice
- A3 - Subcontractor Breached Contract by Refusing to Perform Extra Work as Directed by Contractor unless it First Received Change Order
- A1 - Register for the Upcoming Webinar on Ethical Challenges for Engineers
- A2 - Court will not litigate case until parties first go through mediation as required by contract
- A3 - Economic Waste Doctrine Might Prevail – but no Summary Judgment Granted
- A4 - Additional Insured Prime Contractor Entitled to be Defended under Subcontractor CGL Policy Where Plaintiff Merely Alleged “Damage to Other Property”
- A1 - Economic Loss Doctrine Applied in Utah to Bar Tort Claim against Real Estate Seller. And Prevailing Party Attorneys Fees Awarded
- A2 - Economic Loss Doctrine Enforced in Arizona to Bar Negligence Action by Project Owner against Engineering Subcontractor
- A3 - Broad Arbitration Clause Flowed Down to Subcontractor Requiring it to Arbitrate Claim against Prime Even though not in Dispute with Owner
- A1 - $3 Million Punitive Damage Award for Misrepresentation Reversed Due to Economic Loss Doctrine and also Waiver of Consequential Damages Clause in Contract (Prevailing Party Attorneys Fees also Awarded)
- A1 - Contractor based its Bid on a Design-Build Project on an Erroneous Low Quote from Equipment Supplier whom it then Sued for Detrimental Reliance, Negligence and negligent misrepresentation
- A2 - Design Professionals in Arizona no Longer Owe Duty to Third Parties for Economic Loss
- A3 - Arbitration Demand may be filed after Statute of Limitations Period for Filing Litigation (Maryland Law)
Connect