As construction claim lawyers, we are always on the lookout for insurance policies or “bonds” that might satisfy our client’s claim. On federal projects, this includes performance and payment bonds known as Miller Act bonds. These bonds, which take their name from the federal Miller Act that requires them on all federal contracts over $100,000, protect
In Swinerton Builders, Inc. v. Argonaut Insurance Co., Swinerton Builders, a contractor, sued a surety on bond claims arising from defaults by its subcontractor on a series of work orders. The owner of Swinerton’s mechanical subcontractor on three projects passed away unexpectedly, and the subcontractor was unable to complete its remaining work on the
The words breach and default are often used interchangeably to indicate that somebody hasn’t done what they were legally required to do. According to Black’s Law Dictionary, the words do appear somewhat interchangeable. Black’s defines breach as “a violation or infraction of a law, obligation, or agreement, especially of an official duty or a legal
Following up on our first blog post about employee stock ownership plans (ESOPs) for construction companies, this post addresses surety bond requirements as well as the way in which ESOPs can incentivize employees and increase cash flow.
Construction companies are typically required to obtain surety bonds to guarantee a project owner
The Alabama Legislature recently made several changes to requirements for public works projects that go into effect September 1, 2023. Here’s a summary of the notable changes:
Section 39-1-1 mandates that a contractor performing public works furnish a performance bond equal to 100% of the contract price and a payment bond equal to
In Texas, many master service agreements (MSAs) related to the oil and gas industry typically contain provisions related to mandatory minimum insurance coverage and indemnity obligations. The Texas Supreme Court recently held the terms of an MSA may not be read into an insurance policy unless there is a “clear-manifestation” in the insurance policy the
In Ali Heidari v. Golden Bear Insurance, a California appeals court recently affirmed a lower court’s decision to deny relief under a CGL policy, where the policy excluded from coverage work performed by subcontractors under the contractor’s warranty exclusion. Specifically, the appellate court upheld the trial court’s determination that the insurer did not have a duty
A federal district court in Washington recently rejected a subcontractor’s motion for reconsideration of a previously granted motion to stay in a Miller Act lawsuit (the Miller Act governs prime contractor bond requirements on federal projects and sets forth remedies against the bond for subcontractors, vendors, and suppliers on such projects). In United States of
Michigan has joined the majority of jurisdictions in holding that a general liability policy may provide coverage for claims for property damage allegedly caused by the defective work of a subcontractor. In a unanimous decision reversing the Michigan Court of Appeals, the Michigan Supreme Court held that a subcontractor’s unintentional defective work was an “accident”
Like most states, Florida follows the rule that an insurer’s duty to defend is separate from and broader than its duty to indemnify for a potentially covered occurrence. Last week, in South Winds Construction Corp. v. Preferred Contractors Insurance Company Risk Retention Group, LLC, a Florida appellate court addressed the extent of that duty