In presentations I often mention that every construction contract is the beginning of a construction dispute. The same usually applies to architects agreements and other design contracts too. With that in mind, I'd like to hear from you. What terms do you prefer in your contracts for resolving disputes: nothing, mediation, arbitration? Vote below. And add a comment to elaborate on your vote...
The Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune's Jim Foti reports in I-35 Bridge Firm Settles Suits on Friday's settlement between Progressive Contractors, Inc. (the "contractor") on one side and State of Minnesota and the disaster survivors on the other. Terms of the settlement, approved Friday by Judge Deborah Hedlund, are confidential.
Kyle Hart, one of the contractor's lawyers, said the company's insurers "tendered the limits of the contractor's liability insurance." Chris Messerly, a lawyer for 103 survivors, suggested that the settlement isn't for a huge amount compared to claims against others with a role in the disaster. Others include the engineers who respectively designed and inspected the bridge: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc and URS Corp. The state's lawsuits against Jacobs and URS, and URS's countersuit against the state, are still pending.
Continue Reading...
Construction Law Today is a legal blog about construction contracts, disputes, finance, and the people whose job it is to deal with them.More...
Enter keywords:
