<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>

<rss version="2.0">
 <channel>
  <title>
   Construction Owners &amp; Builders Law Blog
  </title>
  <link>
   http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/
  </link>
  <description>
   
  </description>
  <language>
   en-us
  </language>
  <copyright>
   Copyright 2008
  </copyright>
  <lastBuildDate>
       Sun, 23 Jul 2006 17:33:56 -0600
   
  </lastBuildDate>
  <pubDate>
   Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:08:25 -0600
  </pubDate>
  <generator>
   http://www.movabletype.org/?v=3.34
  </generator>
  <docs>
   http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss
  </docs>
     <item>
    <title>
     Continued Performance Clause Held Unenforceble
    </title>
    <description>
     <![CDATA[The <a href="http://www.realestateandconstructionlawblog.com/construction-claims-contract-clause-requiring-contractor-to-continue-performing-work-during-pendency-of-dispute-between-it-and-owner-and-requiring-it-to-complete-work-before-filing-suit-for-damages-held-unenforceable-due-to-owners-material-breach.html">Real Estate and Construction Blog</a>&nbsp; summarizes a Califonia appellate court recently held a &quot;continued performace clause&quot; is not enforceable when the owner commits a material breach.]]>
           <![CDATA[The <a href="http://www.realestateandconstructionlawblog.com/construction-claims-contract-clause-requiring-contractor-to-continue-performing-work-during-pendency-of-dispute-between-it-and-owner-and-requiring-it-to-complete-work-before-filing-suit-for-damages-held-unenforceable-due-to-owners-material-breach.html">Real Estate and Construction Blog</a>&nbsp; points out that the decision eviscerates the purpose of the clause: &quot;To the extent <em>Barton Properties</em> holds that a continued performance clause is unenforceable when the owner's breach is material, and remains enforceable when a party's breach is minor or immaterial, such clauses would add little or nothing to the parties' legal relationship that is not already part of California law. &quot;]]>
     
    </description>
    <link>
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/construction-contracts-continued-performance-clause-held-unenforceble.html
    </link>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/construction-contracts-continued-performance-clause-held-unenforceble.html
    </guid>
         <category>
      Construction Claims &amp; Disputes
     </category>
         <category>
      Construction Contracts
     </category>
         <category>
      Construction Law
     </category>
         <category>
      Construction Litigation
     </category>
    
    <pubDate>
     Sun, 23 Jul 2006 17:33:56 -0600
    </pubDate>
    <author>
     rcw@williamsonlawfirm.com (Robert Williamson)
    </author>
   </item>
     <item>
    <title>
     Insurance defense practices in construction defect cases
    </title>
    <description>
     <![CDATA[<p><a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=52660">Professor Herbert Kritzer's</a> article on <a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=906338#PaperDownload">"The Commodification of Insurance Defense Practice"</a> in construction defect and other cases is a must read for attorneys representing both claimants and insured.  </p>]]>
     
    </description>
    <link>
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/construction-defects-defective-construction-insurance-defense-practices-in-construction-defect-cases.html
    </link>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/construction-defects-defective-construction-insurance-defense-practices-in-construction-defect-cases.html
    </guid>
         <category>
      Construction Defects &amp; Defective Construction
     </category>
         <category>
      Construction Industry News
     </category>
         <category>
      Construction Law
     </category>
         <category>
      Insurance
     </category>
         <category>
      Insurance Bad Faith
     </category>
    
    <pubDate>
     Tue, 06 Jun 2006 23:58:02 -0600
    </pubDate>
    <author>
     rcw@williamsonlawfirm.com (Robert Williamson)
    </author>
   </item>
     <item>
    <title>
     Is there a difference between honesty and truthfulness?
    </title>
    <description>
     <![CDATA[<p>For lawyers, maybe so, says <a href="http://www.law.wayne.edu/faculty/profiles/henning_peter.html">Professor Peter Henning </a>in an article for the <em>Notre Dame Journal of Law and Ethics</em>. </p>]]>
           <![CDATA[<p>Henning posts a summary of the article and links to a copy at <a href="http://legalethicsforum.typepad.com/blog/2006/06/peter_hennig_on.html">Legal Ethics Forum. </a></p>

<p>Here's the guts of his opinion: </p>

<blockquote>An honest lawyer is one who can be trusted. For the purposes of analyzing the rules that govern a lawyer's conduct, I define honesty to mean that an attorney's expressions and conduct are both accurate and authentic. An accurate statement is one that is truthful and does not intentionally deceive or mislead another person. Accuracy deals with the problem of the technically true but misleading statement or failure to disclose information that the listener would consider important. A deceptive statement would be inaccurate and therefore dishonest. At the same time, a lawyer's statements will be accurate even if they do not fully disclose the truth about a situation. The attorney-client privilege, for example, may restrict what a lawyer can state to third parties, and accuracy requires that the lawyer not mislead while he also is maintaining the confidences protected by the rules of confidentiality. An authentic expression is one that comprehends fairly the lawyer's (and in certain circumstances the client's) intentions.</blockquote>]]>
     
    </description>
    <link>
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/alternative-dispute-resolution-is-there-a-difference-between-honesty-and-truthfulness.html
    </link>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/alternative-dispute-resolution-is-there-a-difference-between-honesty-and-truthfulness.html
    </guid>
         <category>
      Alternative Dispute Resolution
     </category>
         <category>
      Construction Law
     </category>
         <category>
      Trial and Litigation Techniques
     </category>
    
    <pubDate>
     Mon, 05 Jun 2006 02:57:40 -0600
    </pubDate>
    <author>
     rcw@williamsonlawfirm.com (Robert Williamson)
    </author>
   </item>
     <item>
    <title>
     &quot;Binding mediation&quot; is an oxymoron
    </title>
    <description>
     <![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/G033173.PDF">A California appellate court decision banning "binding mediation"</a> is discussed over at <a href="http://www.mayitpleasethecourt.com/journal.asp?blogid=1198">May It Please the Court</a>. </p>]]>
     
    </description>
    <link>
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/alternative-dispute-resolution-binding-mediation-is-an-oxymoron.html
    </link>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/alternative-dispute-resolution-binding-mediation-is-an-oxymoron.html
    </guid>
         <category>
      Alternative Dispute Resolution
     </category>
         <category>
      Arbitration
     </category>
         <category>
      Construction Industry News
     </category>
         <category>
      Construction Law
     </category>
         <category>
      Mediation
     </category>
    
    <pubDate>
     Sun, 04 Jun 2006 16:15:01 -0600
    </pubDate>
    <author>
     rcw@williamsonlawfirm.com (Robert Williamson)
    </author>
   </item>
     <item>
    <title>
     Katrina victims win round when federal court holds the insurance policy ambiguous
    </title>
    <description>
     <![CDATA[<p>Updated: A Mississippi federal district court has held State Farm's insurance policy form ambiguous and that State Farm must pay for wind and water damage even if tidal surge caused later caused further destruction, reports the <a href="http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunherald/news/local/14661783.htm?source=rss&channel=sunherald_local">SunHerald</a>. </p>]]>
           <![CDATA[<p>In an earlier decision , the same Judge had upheld a more specific concurrent-cause exclusion in the Allstate form. <a href="http://news.findlaw.com/ap/f/66/05-25-2006/26d800126f33c52e.html">Findlaw</a> and <a href="http://www.mayitpleasethecourt.com/journal.asp?blogid=1193">May It Please the Court </a>discuss the two decisions. </p>]]>
     
    </description>
    <link>
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/hurricane-katrina-katrina-victims-win-round-when-federal-court-holds-the-insurance-policy-ambiguous.html
    </link>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/hurricane-katrina-katrina-victims-win-round-when-federal-court-holds-the-insurance-policy-ambiguous.html
    </guid>
         <category>
      Construction Law
     </category>
         <category>
      Hurricane Katrina
     </category>
         <category>
      Insurance Bad Faith
     </category>
         <category>
      Insurance Coverage
     </category>
    
    <pubDate>
     Thu, 01 Jun 2006 14:03:38 -0600
    </pubDate>
    <author>
     rcw@williamsonlawfirm.com (Robert Williamson)
    </author>
   </item>
     <item>
    <title>
     The Supreme Court decides to revisit the issue of constitutional limits on punitive damages (UPDATED)
    </title>
    <description>
     <![CDATA[<p>The Court will decide whether its earlier decision in <em><a href="http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/02pdf/01-1289.pdf">State Farm v Campbell</a></em> (i) mandates a reasonable ratio between compensatory and punitive damages when the defendants conduct was outrageous and (ii) prohibits the jury from considering the harm done to persons other than the plaintiff in making its award.</p>]]>
           <![CDATA[<p>The Court will be reviewing the Utah Supreme Court's affirmance in <em><a href="http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/S51085.htm">Philip Morris USA v. Williams</a></em> of a $79.5 million damage award against a tobacco company. The jury awarded the plaintiff $521,485.40 in compensatory damages. The Court's decision to grant review is discussed at the <a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/movabletype/archives/2006/05/orders_2.html">ScotusBlog</a>, <a href="http://volokh.com/posts/1149009726.shtml">The Volokh Conspiracy </a>and <a href="http://www.pointoflaw.com/archives/002544.php">Point of Law Forum</a>.   </p>

<p>My guess--insurers will like what the Court says on these issues. But the <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2006/05/31/punitive-damages-on-the-supreme-court-docket/">WSJ Blog </a>is less sanguine about how the new Justices will vote. </p>]]>
     
    </description>
    <link>
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/construction-claims-disputes-the-supreme-court-decides-to-revisit-the-issue-of-constitutional-limits-on-punitive-damages-updated.html
    </link>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/construction-claims-disputes-the-supreme-court-decides-to-revisit-the-issue-of-constitutional-limits-on-punitive-damages-updated.html
    </guid>
         <category>
      Construction Claims &amp; Disputes
     </category>
         <category>
      Construction Law
     </category>
         <category>
      Construction Litigation
     </category>
         <category>
      Insurance Bad Faith
     </category>
    
    <pubDate>
     Wed, 31 May 2006 23:49:33 -0600
    </pubDate>
    <author>
     rcw@williamsonlawfirm.com (Robert Williamson)
    </author>
   </item>
     <item>
    <title>
     Taking the hand-shake contract to the ultimate level
    </title>
    <description>
     <![CDATA[<p>"We shook hands on it" connotes to folks in the construction business a legally binding deals been made. Would writing the contract with one's own blood connote more? </p>]]>
           <![CDATA[<p>The <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2006/05/31/a-blood-stained-promise-is-a-valid-contract/">WSJ.com Law Blog</a> reports on a California case(where else) that tests whether any special weight should be assigned to a contract writrten in blood.  </p>]]>
     
    </description>
    <link>
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/construction-contracts-taking-the-handshake-contract-to-the-ultimate-level.html
    </link>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/construction-contracts-taking-the-handshake-contract-to-the-ultimate-level.html
    </guid>
         <category>
      Construction Contracts
     </category>
         <category>
      Construction Law
     </category>
    
    <pubDate>
     Wed, 31 May 2006 22:04:55 -0600
    </pubDate>
    <author>
     rcw@williamsonlawfirm.com (Robert Williamson)
    </author>
   </item>
     <item>
    <title>
     How not to write an arbitration agreement
    </title>
    <description>
     <![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.wicourts.gov/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25287">Make the arbitration clause one-sided and give yourself, but not the other party, a way to opt out </a>and the clause is unenforceable according to a recent ruling by the Wisconsin Supreme Court.</p>]]>
           <![CDATA[<p><a href="http://arbitration-forum.blogspot.com/2006/05/wisconsin-supreme-court-says.html">The National Arbitration Association Forum Blog</a> discusses the opinion. </p>]]>
     
    </description>
    <link>
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/arbitration-how-not-to-write-an-arbitration-agreement.html
    </link>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/arbitration-how-not-to-write-an-arbitration-agreement.html
    </guid>
         <category>
      Alternative Dispute Resolution
     </category>
         <category>
      Arbitration
     </category>
         <category>
      Construction Contracts
     </category>
         <category>
      Construction Industry News
     </category>
         <category>
      Construction Law
     </category>
    
    <pubDate>
     Tue, 30 May 2006 23:32:10 -0600
    </pubDate>
    <author>
     rcw@williamsonlawfirm.com (Robert Williamson)
    </author>
   </item>
     <item>
    <title>
     The Federal Prompt Pay Act sets time limits for payment of government construction contractors
    </title>
    <description>
     <![CDATA[<p>The provisions of the Act are summarized and linked to over at <a href="http://utahconstruction.blogspot.com/2006/05/federal-prompt-payment-act.html">Construction Lawyer-Utah</a>. </p>]]>
     
    </description>
    <link>
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/construction-contracts-the-federal-prompt-pay-act-sets-time-limits-for-payment-of-government-construction-contractors.html
    </link>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/construction-contracts-the-federal-prompt-pay-act-sets-time-limits-for-payment-of-government-construction-contractors.html
    </guid>
         <category>
      Construction Claims &amp; Disputes
     </category>
         <category>
      Construction Contracts
     </category>
         <category>
      Construction Law
     </category>
         <category>
      Construction Litigation
     </category>
         <category>
      Government Contracts
     </category>
    
    <pubDate>
     Tue, 30 May 2006 23:09:14 -0600
    </pubDate>
    <author>
     rcw@williamsonlawfirm.com (Robert Williamson)
    </author>
   </item>
     <item>
    <title>
     The effect of giving an insurer late notice on a otherwise covered construction claim
    </title>
    <description>
     <![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.insurancescrawl.com/personalprofile.html">Marc Mayerson</a> over at the <a href="http://insurancescrawl.com/">Insurance Scrawl </a>does his usual masterful job discussing recent case law on <a href="http://www.insurancescrawl.com/archives/2006/05/late_notice_by.html">when late notice results in forfeiture of insurance coverage. </a></p>]]>
     
    </description>
    <link>
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/insurance-coverage-the-effect-of-giving-an-insurer-late-notice-on-a-otherwise-covered-construction-claim.html
    </link>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/insurance-coverage-the-effect-of-giving-an-insurer-late-notice-on-a-otherwise-covered-construction-claim.html
    </guid>
         <category>
      Construction Claims &amp; Disputes
     </category>
         <category>
      Construction Contracts
     </category>
         <category>
      Construction Law
     </category>
         <category>
      Insurance
     </category>
         <category>
      Insurance Bad Faith
     </category>
         <category>
      Insurance Coverage
     </category>
    
    <pubDate>
     Sun, 28 May 2006 22:20:57 -0600
    </pubDate>
    <author>
     rcw@williamsonlawfirm.com (Robert Williamson)
    </author>
   </item>
     <item>
    <title>
     Expert&apos;s testimony on lost profits deemed unreliable.
    </title>
    <description>
     <![CDATA[<p>What expert witness testimony is required to recover lost profits in construction litigation under the <em>Daubert</em> standard? </p>]]>
           <![CDATA[<p>A hint can be gleaned from the Mississippi Supreme Court's decision last week in <a href="http://www.mslawyer.com/mssc/cases/20060525/0401438.html"><em>Webb v Braswell</em></a>, a lender liability and accounting malpractice case. The Court held the trial court had properly rejected an economist's testimony that the plaintiffs had lost profits as a result of the defendant's failure to fund a crop production loan. The Court reasoned that <em>Daubert</em> required the testimony be based on past profitability and the expert's testimony was unreliable because the plaintiffs had always lost money on their farm operations in the past. </p>]]>
     
    </description>
    <link>
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/mississippi-construction-law-experts-testimony-on-lost-profits-deemed-unreliable.html
    </link>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/mississippi-construction-law-experts-testimony-on-lost-profits-deemed-unreliable.html
    </guid>
         <category>
      Mississippi Construction Law
     </category>
    
    <pubDate>
     Sun, 28 May 2006 21:58:33 -0600
    </pubDate>
    <author>
     rcw@williamsonlawfirm.com (Robert Williamson)
    </author>
   </item>
     <item>
    <title>
     The use of Engineering, Procurement, Construction Contracts for offshore wind farms
    </title>
    <description>
     <![CDATA[<p>An <a href="http://contracts.onecle.com/medimmune/fluor.construct.1996.08.09.shtml">Engineering, Procurement and Construction contract (EPC)</a> requires the contractor to bear the construction risks and to deliver a "turn-key" project. </p>]]>
           <![CDATA[<p>The <a href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/contractsprof_blog/2006/05/risk_and_reward.html">ContractsProf Blog </a>points to a report describing <a href="http://www.mondaq.com/article.asp?articleid=39948&email_access=on">how reluctant contractors are to assume construction  risks on new offshore wind energy projects. </a></p>]]>
     
    </description>
    <link>
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/construction-contracts-the-use-of-engineering-procurement-construction-contracts-for-offshore-wind-farms.html
    </link>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/construction-contracts-the-use-of-engineering-procurement-construction-contracts-for-offshore-wind-farms.html
    </guid>
         <category>
      Construction Contracts
     </category>
         <category>
      Construction Law
     </category>
    
    <pubDate>
     Fri, 26 May 2006 23:00:10 -0600
    </pubDate>
    <author>
     rcw@williamsonlawfirm.com (Robert Williamson)
    </author>
   </item>
     <item>
    <title>
     Designing a fire suppression system for a new building
    </title>
    <description>
     <![CDATA[<p>The <a href="http://www.njlawblog.com/litigation-461-environmental-factors-must-be-considered-in-the-design-of-fire-suppression-systems.html">New Jersey Law Blog </a>provides important "how to" advice about designing a non-defective fire suppression system for a new building. </p>]]>
     
    </description>
    <link>
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/construction-contracts-designing-a-fire-suppression-system-for-a-new-building.html
    </link>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/construction-contracts-designing-a-fire-suppression-system-for-a-new-building.html
    </guid>
         <category>
      Construction Contracts
     </category>
    
    <pubDate>
     Thu, 25 May 2006 02:41:36 -0600
    </pubDate>
    <author>
     rcw@williamsonlawfirm.com (Robert Williamson)
    </author>
   </item>
     <item>
    <title>
     Construction Litigation--the Paper Chase no more
    </title>
    <description>
     <![CDATA[<p>I've joined the debate over the wisdom of the paperless office over at <a href="http://www.illinoistrialpractice.com/2006/05/do_away_with_pa.html">The Illinois Trial Practice Weblog</a>. </p>]]>
           <![CDATA[<p>The paperless office saves clients money--facilitates keepoing them informed--and makes me a better lawyer. It's a no brainer.</p>]]>
     
    </description>
    <link>
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/construction-industry-news-construction-litigationthe-paper-chase-no-more.html
    </link>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/construction-industry-news-construction-litigationthe-paper-chase-no-more.html
    </guid>
         <category>
      Attorney&apos;s fees &amp; Case Management
     </category>
         <category>
      Construction Claims &amp; Disputes
     </category>
         <category>
      Construction Industry News
     </category>
    
    <pubDate>
     Thu, 25 May 2006 02:35:42 -0600
    </pubDate>
    <author>
     rcw@williamsonlawfirm.com (Robert Williamson)
    </author>
   </item>
     <item>
    <title>
     When is owner non-compliance with payment terms a material breach of contract?
    </title>
    <description>
     <![CDATA[<p>A material breach by the owner ordinarily relieves the contractor of his duty to perform. <a href="http://www.govcontractslitigation.com/archives/case-summaries-87-whatas-a-material-breach.html">Non-payment by the government as a material breach of contract </a>is the subject of a <em><a href="http://www.govcontractslitigation.com/">Government Contracts Litigation</a></em> post. </p>]]>
     
    </description>
    <link>
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/construction-contracts-when-is-owner-noncompliance-with-payment-terms-a-material-breach-of-contract.html
    </link>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">
     http://www.constructionownerslawblog.com/construction-contracts-when-is-owner-noncompliance-with-payment-terms-a-material-breach-of-contract.html
    </guid>
         <category>
      Construction Contracts
     </category>
         <category>
      Construction Law
     </category>
         <category>
      Government Contracts
     </category>
    
    <pubDate>
     Thu, 25 May 2006 02:16:22 -0600
    </pubDate>
    <author>
     rcw@williamsonlawfirm.com (Robert Williamson)
    </author>
   </item>
  
 </channel>
</rss>