Liquidated Damages Clause Bars Separate Recovery for Lost Power Sales Even Though Loss is Many Times Greater Than Liquidated Damage Amount – Correction Damages, However, Are Separately Recoverable

El Dorado Irrigation Dist. v. Traylor Bros., Inc.
No. 03-949, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1354 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2006)

In El Dorado Irrigation Dist. v. Traylor Bros., Inc., No. 03-949, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1354 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2006), the court construed the effect of a liquidated damages clause on plaintiff’s ability to recover other categories of actual damages. The plaintiff sued the defendant contractor, seeking recovery of liquidated damages, loss of power sales, loss of public grant funds, and other damages related to the late completion of the project. The contract contained a liquidated damages clause, which defined the “damages for Contractor delay” at $500 per calendar day. Continue reading “Liquidated Damages Clause Bars Separate Recovery for Lost Power Sales Even Though Loss is Many Times Greater Than Liquidated Damage Amount – Correction Damages, However, Are Separately Recoverable”

Contractor’s Continued Acceptance of Subcontractor’s Performance Waives Right To Terminate

Ed Kimber Heating & Cooling, Inc. v. Travelers Casualty & Surety Co.
No. 3:03cv2111 (SRU), 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3323 (D. Conn. Jan. 26, 2006)

Trataros Construction, Inc. (“Trataros”), the general contractor on a school addition and renovation project, subcontracted with Ed Kimber Heating & Cooling, Inc. (“Kimber”) for the performance of HVAC and plumbing work. Travelers Casualty & Surety Co. (“Travelers”) issued payment and performance bonds as the surety for Trataros. Continue reading “Contractor’s Continued Acceptance of Subcontractor’s Performance Waives Right To Terminate”

Statute Of Limitations Not Tolled by Discovery Rule under AIA Article 9.3

Gustine Uniontown Assocs., LTD v. Anthony Crane Rental, Inc.
2006 PA Super 12 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2006)

In conjunction with its construction of a shopping mall over a non-functioning coal mine, project owner Gustine entered into a standard American Institute of Architect form of agreement, AIA B141, with the project architect ASG. Article 9.3 of the contract stated:

“Causes of action between the parties to this Agreement pertaining to acts or failures to act shall be deemed to have accrued and the applicable statutes of limitations shall commence to run not later than either the date of Substantial Completion for acts or failures to act occurring prior to Substantial Completion, or the date of issuance of the final Certificate for Payment for acts or failures to act occurring after Substantial Completion.” Continue reading “Statute Of Limitations Not Tolled by Discovery Rule under AIA Article 9.3”