Source: https://lgwmlaw.com/news-media/practice-area/construction
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 12:00:09+00:00

Document:
There are no articles currently for that practice area!
In D.R. Horton, Inc. v. Heron’s Landing Condo. Assn. of Jacksonville, Inc., No. 1D17-1941, 2018 WL 6803698 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App., 1st Dist. 2018), the First District Court of Appeals of Florida affirmed a Florida Circuit Court’s ruling that a breach of the implied warranty of habitability did not require a condominium to be uninhabitable.
In Ex parte Killian Constr. Co., No. 1170696, 2018 WL 5730138, at *1 (Ala. Nov. 2, 2018), the Alabama Supreme Court issued a writ directing the lower court to dismiss the claims against Killian Construction Company (“Killian”) based on improper venue. The Court found the forum selection clause in the parties contract was enforceable, despite the case having almost no contracts with the contractually selected forum.
In Precision Roofing, Inc., Appellant v. David Zavelson & Tracy Zavelson, Appellees, No. 03-17-00550-CV, 2018 WL 5852680, at *1 (Tex. App. Nov. 9, 2018), the Texas Court of Appeals addressed the validity of a subcontractor’s materialman’s liens.
In Stoneledge at Lake Keowee Owners' Assoc., Inc. v. IMK Dev. Co., LLC, No. 2015-000417, 2018 WL 4905772, at *1 (S.C. Ct. App. Oct. 10, 2018), the South Carolina Court of Appeals affirms the trial court’s decision to deny a request for a directed verdict and allow the jury to determine whether or not the claims were time-barred.
In Forbes v. Prime Gen. Contractors, Inc., No. 2D17-353, 2018 WL 4265287, at *1 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Sept. 7, 2018), Florida’s Second District Court of Appeals rejected a trial courts decision to only consider benefit of the bargain damages, holding that in cases involving a material breach of the contract the non-breaching party has the option to elect either benefit of the bargain damages or damages to put them in the place they would have been had the contract never been formed.
In The Manor Homes, LLC v. Ashby Communities, LLC, et al., No. M201701369COAR3CV, 2018 WL 3814981 (Tenn. Ct. App. Aug. 10, 2018), the Court of Appeals of Tennessee affirmed a ruling precluding recovery by the developer due to it committing a prior material breach of the contract. The case involved the construction of a house in Arrington, Tennessee. Ashby Communities, LLC (“Ashby”) was the developer and owner. Ashby entered into a contract with The Manor Homes, LLC (“Manor Homes”) to serve as its builder.
The Alabama legislature recently amended provisions of the Home Builders Licensure Board Act (the “HBLB Act”) to expand the scope of home building projects and companies required to comply with the HBLB Act. The HBLB Act was originally enacted to protect individual homeowners when engaging a Construction company to either build a new home or during a remodel. The HBLB Act required General Contractors to obtain a license from the Home Builders Licensure Board (the “Board”) prior to entering into contracts with perspective clients.
In United Riggers & Erectors, Inc. v. Coast Iron & Steel Co., No. S231549, 2018 WL 2188916 (Cal. May 14, 2018), the Supreme Court of California determined that while a general contractor or owner may withhold monies from subcontractors in circumstances where a dispute has arisen between the parties, the exception is limited to only those amounts actually in dispute.
In Blok Builders, LLC v. Katryniok, No. 4D16-1811, 2018 WL 637399 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Jan. 31, 2018), the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District, overturned a trial court’s decision requiring a subcontractor to defend and indemnify a project owner based on a reference in the Subcontract which adopted and incorporated by reference the terms of the General Contract, that include an indemnification provision between the Owner and General Contractor.
In Patrick Durkin v. MTown Construction, LLC, N No. W201701269COAR3CV, 2018 WL 1304922, (Tenn. Ct. App. Mar. 13, 2018), the Court of Appeals of Tennessee overturned an award of property damages which was predicated in part upon the diminution of property value based upon a finding that the defendant had failed to present sufficient evidence establishing the unreasonableness of the costs to repair the real property.
In Devin B. Strickland v. Arch Insurance Company, No. 17-10610, 2018 WL 327443 (11th Cir. Jan. 9, 2018), the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court’s determination that Strickland’s claim against the bond surety was time-barred due to his waiting more than one year after the completion of the contract and the acceptance by the public authority to bring suit.
In Perez-Gurri Corp. v. McLeod, No. 3D15-2590, 2017 WL 5616924, at *1 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Nov. 22, 2017), the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District, overturned a trial court’s decision to preclude a general contractor from seeking delay damages on the basis that the subcontractors were not intended third-party beneficiaries of the contract between the general contractor and the owner.
In Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Hardin Constr. Grp., Inc., 697 F. App'x 637 (11th Cir. 2017), the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama’s conclusion that a specific written timeframe is necessary in order to extend Alabama’s statute of repose.
In Team Contractors, L.L.C. v. Waypoint Nola, L.L.C., et al., No. CV 16-1131, 2017 WL 4366855 (E.D. La. Sept. 29, 2017), the United States District Court for the Eastern Division of Louisiana concluded that because the contract was ambiguous as to whether the type of lost profits sought in the case were considered “consequential damage” by the terms of the contract, the matter was not ripe for summary judgment as it required it to determine whether the parties intended such damages to fall within the contract’s “consequential damages” waiver.
In Am. Builders & Contractors Supply Co. v. Precision Roofing & Consulting, LLC, No. 2:17CV97-WHA, 2017 WL 3431844, (M.D. Ala. Aug. 9, 2017), the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama dismissed a breach of contract claim filed against a distributor that provided supplies to a roofing subcontractor in light of the plaintiff, a subcontractor, having failed to obtain its own license at the time work commenced.
In LaShip, LLC v. Hayward Baker, Inc., No. 15-30816, 2017 WL 829503 (Mar. 1, 2017), the Fifth Circuit held a commercial contractor was not required to warn the owner of alleged defects in the design specifications of foundation columns that were provided by the engineer despite the fact the contractor had specialized experience in foundation design. The Fifth Circuit refused to broaden the affirmative tort duty to warn based on a party’s expertise and upheld the statutory protections for the contractor.
In Anderson v. Taylor Morrison of Florida, Inc., No. 2D16-314, 2017 WL 2374404 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. May 31, 2017), the Second District Court of Appeal of Florida held an arbitration provision in a homeowner’s sales agreement was void as against public policy because it limited the homeowner’s statutory remedies.
In CGM Const., Inc. v. Sydor, 42 N.Y.S.3d 407 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016), the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division for the Third Department, held a contractor was not liable for alleged inadequate work performed on the owner’s property, because the contractor followed the owner’s instructions when performing the work. The Court found the contract was a design specification contract, which allows a contractor not to be held liable for defects when the contractor follows the plans and specifications provided.
Dykema v. Del Webb Communities, Inc., No. 69335, 2016 WL 7626184 (Nev. Dec. 29, 2016), the Nevada Supreme Court clarified when a notice of completion is “issued” under NRS 11.2055(1)(b), which establishes the date of substantial completion for statute of repose purposes.
In Sierra Pacific Industries v. Bradbury, 2016 WL 4699116 (Colo. App. September 8, 2016), the Colorado Court of Civil Appeals, Division I, upheld the district court’s entry of summary judgement in favor of a subcontractor on an indemnification claim for damages, costs and expenses related to an underlying construction defect claim brought by the condominium association based on the statute of repose.
In Centerpoint Builders GP, LLC v. Trussway, Ltd., 2016 WL 3413329 (Tex. 2016), the Texas Supreme Court held the general contractor, Centerpoint Builders, LLC (“Centerpoint”), was not a “seller” under the Texas Products Liability Act and could not obtain indemnity from the manufacturer of the defective product even though Centerpoint had not altered the product in any form.
In Schindler v. Tully Construction Co., 139 A.D.3d 930 (May 18, 2016), the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, reversed a trial court’s award of $209,000.00 in delay damages in favor of a subcontractor on a public contract in a nonjury trial.
In Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Board v. INET Airport Systems, Incorp., et al., 2016 WL 1445205 (5th Cir. April 12, 2016), the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a trial court’s $1.29 million judgment in favor of the contractor and against the owner. The Fifth Circuit determined genuine issues of fact remained regarding whether the owner first breached the contract by failing to cooperate with the contractor to resolve change orders.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.