RKI Expl. & Prod., LLC v. Ameriflow Energy Servs., LLC, No. 02-20-00384-CV, 2022 Tex. App. LEXIS 4331 (Tex. App. June 23, 2022)

A recent decision by the Court of Appeals of Texas highlights the perils of failing to properly assert a demand for contractual indemnity.

In 2014, a piece of equipment, known as a sand separator, exploded at an oil well in Loving County, TX, killing two individuals and injuring three others. RKI Exploration & Production LLC operated the oil well. RKI contracted with Ameriflow Energy Services LLC and Crescent Services LLC through two master service agreements (MSAs) and a series of work orders.

Continue Reading Not Everything Is Bigger in Texas: Court of Appeals Reverses Trial Court’s Expansive Interpretation of Indemnity Clause

New York State Thruway Auth. v. CHA Consulting, Inc., 165 N.Y.S.3d 832 (Albany Co., Sup. Ct. 2022).

This case involved a dispute over a wind turbine project. The root cause of the dispute was a bust between the “wind turbulence” at the site, and the wind turbulence that the turbines installed could withstand. Once the project was completed and commissioned, the overworked turbines prematurely failed.

Continue Reading Twists and Turbines — A New York Case Highlights an Owner’s Risk When Not Using Full-Wrap EPC Delivery

United States ex rel. Spirtas Worldwide, LLC v. SGLC Consulting LLC, No. 3:21-CV-00182-MAB, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105589; 2022 WL 2116451 (S.D. Ill. June 13, 2022)

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois recently enforced a partially executed agreement to arbitrate where the party that failed to countersign demonstrated assent through its acts and conduct.

Continue Reading Illinois Federal District Court Enforces Partially Executed Agreement to Arbitrate

Triple B Servs., LLP v. City of Conroe, No. 09-21-00096-CV, 2022 Tex. App. LEXIS 4824, 2022 WL 2720451 (Tex. App. July 14, 2022)

The Texas Court of Appeals recently affirmed a ruling granting the city of Conroe governmental immunity from a contractor’s lawsuit asserting claims for breach of contract and violation of the Texas Public Prompt Pay Act.

Continue Reading Texas Appellate Court Affirms Grant of Governmental Immunity From Suit Seeking Delay Costs

Pizzarotti, LLC v. X-Treme Concrete Inc., 205 A.D.3d 487 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)

A New York appellate court recently affirmed the dismissal of a subcontractor’s counterclaims for delay damages and for unpaid amounts because they were barred by the parties’ no-damage-for-delay provision and executed lien waivers, respectively.

Continue Reading No-Damage-For-Delay Provisions and Lien Waivers Remain Enforceable — and Valuable — in New York

Constructural Dynamics, Inc. v. Thomas P. Carney, Inc., No. 1104 EDA 2021, 2022 Pa. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 1500 (Pa. Super. July 1, 2022), reargument denied (Sept. 8, 2022).

Like many prompt payment acts, Pennsylvania’s Contractor and Subcontractor Payment Act (CASPA) permits owners and contractors to withhold payment for good faith claims — but not forever. Owners and contractors who wait too long could find themselves litigating prompt payment claims and paying the penalties those acts impose on procrastinating payors. A recent decision by the Pennsylvania Superior Court provides some guidance on how long is “too long” to withhold.

Continue Reading Pennsylvania Superior Court Places Time Limit on Good Faith Withholding Under CASPA

Town of New Milford v. Std. Demolition Srvcs., Inc., 212 Conn. App. 30 (2022)

The case involved cleanup and environmental remediation of a vacant factory contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls and asbestos. The town of New Milford (Town) contracted with Standard Demolition Services, Inc. (Contractor) to perform the third phase of this cleanup and remediation. Following a series of disputes and project delays, the Town terminated the Contractor. At the time of termination, the Contractor had performed less than 10% of its scope of work. The Town then rebid the remaining work and hired a third-party to complete the project.

Continue Reading Careful Contract Drafting Could Mean Recovery of Liquidated Damages and Actual and Consequential Damages

With more than half of 2022 in the books, Troutman Pepper’s award-winning Construction Practice Group recaps some of the more major developments from the last year and looks ahead to what the remainder holds.

Continue Reading Biggest Construction Developments of 2022 to Date and What We’re Watching

Accreditation: An extract from GAR’s Construction Arbitration Know-how. The whole publication is available at https://globalarbitrationreview.com/insight/know-how/construction-arbitration.

Troutman Pepper Partners Albert Bates and Zachary Torres-Fowler are published in GAR Insight with their article, “GAR Know How Construction Arbitration: USA (September 2022).” This chapter summarizes issues commonly raised during international construction arbitrations seated in the United States or governed by U.S. laws. This chapter should be a useful resource for those seeking to better understand the interplay between U.S. laws and international construction arbitration.

Read full chapter.

This article summarizes statutory remedies available to contractors, subcontractors and material suppliers when upstream parties fail or refuse to release payments on public and private construction projects. Entities furnishing work or materials have several statutory means to enforce their rights to payment, including mechanic’s liens, payment bond claims, and/or claims for violation of state prompt payment laws. While their requirements may vary by project and state, these remedies should be at the forefront of every practitioner’s mind when faced with a dispute over payment.

Click here to read the full article on ABA Forum on Construction Law.