Contract Interpretation

Government contracts often include a termination for convenience clause, generally allowing federal agencies to cancel agreements when it serves the government’s interest. While this power is fairly broad, it is not absolute — and when misused, contractors may have legal recourse. Several court cases highlight situations where termination for convenience was found to be an

The Washington Court of Appeals recently affirmed a jury verdict and $30 million judgment for general contractor Skanska. The case involves the construction of the 41-story Nexus condominium tower in downtown Seattle. As is often the case, one of the central issues was whether Skanska was entitled to be paid for alleged changes to its

Here at Bradley we frequently represent clients pursuing or opposing claims for lost productivity on construction jobs. The gist of those claims is that something happened which decreased productivity and thereby increased costs. That something can be just about anything.  Differing site conditions. Unreasonable or conflicting instructions. A global pandemic. Lost productivity claims seek to reallocate costs

Hark! A recent Alabama Supreme Court indemnity decision, Mobile Infirmary Association v. Quest Diagnostics Clinical Laboratories, may require you to retrieve your drafting pen. Although not a case involving a construction dispute, Mobile Infirmary does address a key component of risk shifting in construction contracts — the indemnity clause. Put simply, contractual indemnity is

Construction law is largely a matter of contract law. Yes, there are federal and state statutes that deal with construction issues and, yes, construction cases sometimes involve tort claims, but more often than not, construction disputes revolve around the parties’ contract. What constitutes the parties’ contract is frequently undisputed. As one developer learned last week, that is

Construction contracts for private projects will soon be subject to a new retainage law in Mississippi. On April 19, 2024, Gov. Tate Reeves approved SB 2762 into law, and after July 1, 2024, most construction contracts on projects in Mississippi will comply with a set of retainage laws similar to those that have governed public

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

Construction contracts often include clauses that purport to limit the liability of one or both parties. This includes clauses that completely prohibit any claims for certain types of damages such as lost profits and other consequential damages, extended overhead or other “delay” damages, and exemplary/punitive damages. Contracting parties may also include clauses that purport to cap liability

Retainage can be tricky in Alabama, particularly on public projects. In this post, we address retainage on public projects for public owners in the state (e.g., a governmental board, commission, agency, body, authority, instrumentality, or department).

A public owner in Alabama may withhold up to 5% retainage from the prime contractor for up to 50%

A fundamental premise of contract law is that promises must be kept. If legally enforceable promises or “contracts” are not kept, courts may step in to enforce them by ordering performance, awarding damages, or granting some other form of relief. Over time, courts have developed exceptions to the general rule that promises must be kept.