Proving and Pricing Construction Claims, 4th Edition (1-year Online Subscription)

Proving and Pricing Construction Claims, Fourth Edition, provides subscribers with in-depth analysis and valuable discussions on the methods of both calculating and proving the amount of damages sustained in construction disputes. It is a practical guide to the type of evidence that should be presented in court and how to best present that evidence. From checklists to comprehensive analysis, you get all the tools you need. This complete resource includes a variety of winning strategies, practice tips, and helpful checklists to minimize damages and maximize collectability.

The following developments and issues are included in the Fourth Edition:

• Indemnification implied-in-law existed between defendants when they were jointly and severally liable to the plaintiff, and either one had been passively negligent but was exposed to liability through the active negligence of the other or one alone had done the act which produced the injury but the other was derivatively liable for the negligence of the former.
• The change-order clause in the subcontract was the mechanism by which the cost adjustment contemplated in the bid proposal was to be carried out. Because the subcontractor had not followed the change order protocol in the subcontract, the subcontractor could not recover the cost of its extra work.
• Because the city breached the contract by terminating the contract without providing the opportunity to cure alleged defects, the city was not entitled to its claimed post-termination damages and costs.
• Owners and contractors should make the decision to terminate a party for default only after deliberate contract administration, providing help for struggling parties where possible, and without allowing their personal frustrationsto impact the termination decision.
• A public owner’s damages were not based upon its expectation interest for an airport taxiway that required a redesign. The proper measure of damages was the cost of repair to conform to the project’s bargained-for state: the taxiway’s original design.
• A new business with no past sales must prove its lost profits with expert testimony based on tests performed under substantially similar circumstances using specific data.
• A contractor did not have to provide periodic detailed invoices in the absence of contract language in a cost-plus contract creating a fiduciary relationship.
• The Miller Act does not preempt or limit the Miller Act surety’s liability to a subcontractor.