Judge John Roberts on Construction Law Issues
A Lexis search turned up three opinions directly related to construction law issues and claims authored by President Bush's nominee for the Supreme Court, Judge John Roberts of the D.C. Circuit.
False Claims:
In United States ex rel. Totten v. Bombardier Corp. a divided panel held that the False Claims Act applied only to false claims involving direct contracts with the federal government not false claims involving contracts with federal grantees. The decision involved allegedly false claims presented by contractors to Amtrak. Judge Robert's opinion for the panel majority emphasized the language of the statute over legislative history that arguably supported a broader reading of the statute. The dissent emphasized the remedial scope of the Act as amended.
The decision is important to contractors doing construction work for state and private entities. A Utah district court recently held that the dissenter rather than Judge Roberts correctly interpreted the statute and permitted a whistle blower suit to proceed against highway contractors for alleged false claims submitted to a state agency grantee administering federal highway construction funds. For my earlier post on this Utah decision click here.
Arbitration:
In Booker v. Robert Half Int'l, Inc. unanimous panel affirmed a district court order compelling arbitration of a dispute under an employment contract even though the arbitration clause contained a waiver of punitive damages inconsistent with remedies available under the District of Columbia Human Rights Act. In his opinion, Judge Roberts relied on a severability clause in the contract providing that "[i]f any provision is found by any court of competent jurisdiction to be unreasonable and invalid, that determination shall not affect the enforceability of other provisions."
Robert's noted other circuit courts of appeal had found the inclusion of an illegal remedy sufficient deny enforcement of an arbitration clause, but suggested the severance clause made them distinguishable. He also emphasized the importance under the Federal Arbitration Act of enforcing the dispute mechanism chosen by the parties.
Architect's Liability:
In Outlaw v. Airtech Air Conditioning & Heating, Inc., a unanimous panel affirmed summary judgement for an architect sued by an owner for defects in the HVAC system following renovation of the owner's building. As discussed in my post about the case, Judge Robert's opinion emphasized the absence of any evidence tying the defects to the work of the architect.
An analysis of Judge Robert's decisions in the brief time he has been on the bench reveals no "clear ideological pattern" according to an analysis posted at The Supreme Court Nomination Blog.