Author Archives: constructlawph

Sovereign Immunity Bars Contractor’s Claims for Unjust Enrichment and Promissory Estoppel Against City Government on Semi-Public Project

Harakas Constr., Inc. v. Metro Gov’t of Nashville, 2018 Tenn. App. LEXIS 45 (Tenn. App. January 29, 2018)  BK Partners LLC (“BK”) sought to build a condominium complex in Davidson County.  This required an upgrade to the existing public sewer … Continue reading

Posted in Promissory Estoppel, Sovereign Immunity, Unjust Enrichment | Tagged , ,

Supreme Court of North Dakota: Where Contract Provided That Either Party Could Cancel Upon 30 Days’ Notice, the Non-Breaching Party Seeking Lost Profits Could Only Recover the Lost Profits it Would Have Earned During the Notice Period

Cont’l Res. v. P&P Indus., LLC, 2018 N.D. Lexis 20 (January 22, 2018) In 2013, Continental Resources Inc. (“Continental”), an oil producer doing business in North Dakota, entered into a master servicing agreement, governed by Oklahoma law, with United Oilfield … Continue reading

Posted in Damages, Termination | Tagged , , , , ,

Eleventh Circuit Holds That the Statute of Limitations on Payment Bond Claim Under Georgia Law Commences at Substantial Completion Rather Than Final Acceptance

Strickland v. Arch Ins. Co., No. 17-10610, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 504 (11th Cir. Jan. 9, 2018) Strickland provided sand to a paving company (“Douglas”) for a Georgia Department of Transportation (“GDOT”) road improvement project (the “Project”).  Arch Insurance Company … Continue reading

Posted in Payment bond, Statute of Limitations | Tagged , , ,

California Supreme Court Clarifies That “Right to Repair Act” is Exclusive Remedy for Both Economic Loss and Property Damage Arising From Construction Defects

McMillin Albany LLC v. Superior Court, No. S229762, 2018 Cal. LEXIS 211 (Jan. 18, 2018) Several homeowners (“Plaintiffs”) brought suit against developer/general contractor McMillin Albany LLC (“McMillin”) for alleged defective construction of new homes.  Plaintiffs alleged the defects caused property … Continue reading

Posted in Defective Work | Tagged , , , ,

Federal Court in Mississippi Holds That Although Projects Were Constructed With Federal Funds, They Were Not “A Public Work of the Federal Government” and Therefore the Court Had No Jurisdiction Over a Subcontractor’s Claim Under the Miller Act, Where the United States Was Not a Contracting Party and the Projects Were Not Constructed on Federal Property

United States ex rel. Metro Mech., Inc. v. Triangle Constr. Co.,  2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1487 (S.D. Miss. Jan. 4, 2018) Triangle Construction Company, Inc. (“Triangle”) contracted with Mississippi Portfolio Partners III, LP (“Mississippi Partners”) to serve as the prime … Continue reading

Posted in Miller Act, Payment bond | Tagged , , , , ,