Seattle, WA
Construction and development Lawyer at Seattle, WA
Practice Areas: Construction & Development, Lawsuits & Disputes, Government
OUTCOME: Client (subcontractors) prevailed
The Department of Labor and Industries sought to apply prevailing wages to subcontractors (women owned business enterprises) on the Third SeaTac Runway Project. The subcontractors prevailed at the admi ... nistrative hearing and the Dept. appealed the matter all the way through the Supreme Court, where the subcontractors again prevailed.
OUTCOME: Client (general contractor) prevailed
A general contractor was wrongfully terminated by a developer. The general contractor sued for the damages and prevailed at trial, and was awarded its attorneys' fees. The developer appealed the trial ... court's verdict and the appeals court upheld the verdict.
OUTCOME: Client prevailed in part and lost in part
On a Fort Lewis Military Barracks construction project, the steel fabrication contractor went out of business and failed to pay its supplier. A claim was made by the supplier against the general contra ... ctor's bond. The supplier had signed progress payment releases, but nevertheless asserted a claim against the general contractor for non-payment. On appeal, the court held that the supplier was due payment, the release notwithstanding, but reduced the amount of payment due the supplier.
OUTCOME: Client (subcontractors) prevailed
The Department of Labor and Industries assessed prevailing wages against women owned trucking companies that hauled fill to the SeaTac Third Runway Project. The issue before the court was whether the t ... ruck drivers were entitled to prevailing wages under the State Little Davis Bacon Act. The Court of Appeals unanimously ruled in favor of the subcontractor trucking companies.
OUTCOME: Client (general contractor) prevailed
An owner of a subcontractor sought to sue the general contractor for breach of contract, wrongful termination, trespass and conversion of subcontractor's tools and supplies. General contractor prevaile ... d, the subcontractor owner was not the real party in interest and could not bring a lawsuit.
OUTCOME: Client (contractor) prevailed
Foster-Wheeler Environmental Corp. ("Foster") leased several pieces of heavy construction equipment from Kelly-Ryan, Inc. ("Kelly-Ryan") for use on an arctic environmental remediation project. Foster f ... ailed to return a specially designed arctic truck (the "Snow Bird"). At the end of the project, Kelly-Ryan sought recovery of damages for the loss of the use of the truck. Kelly-Ryan prevailed at trial and on appeal.
OUTCOME: Client (general contractor) did not prevail
The general contractor A&E Roofing, Inc. was awarded a contract to repair a hangar at Fort Riley, Alaska. The issue on appeal was whether the contract drawings required the installation of wood surface ... mounted nailers. The contractor's position is that the contract documents were ambiguous and therefore, no such nailers were required. The court decided the case against the general contractor.
OUTCOME: Client (subcontractor) prevailed
Ebasco Constructors, Inc. ("Ebasco") was the general contractor for the Alaska Radar system Over the Horizon Backscatter Radar project which was to be built on property owned by Ahtna, Inc. in Glenalle ... n, Alaska. When the Backscatter project was cancelled, Ahtna, at Ebasco's request submitted a termination claim. Ebasco failed to pass through to the government and Ahtna was awarded in excess of $3 million and its attorneys' fees in bringing the arbitration. Ebasco appealed the arbitration award to the Superior Court and then brought this action in the Supreme Court of the State of Alaska. Ebasco sought review of the arbitration; the Supreme Court of the State of Alaska upheld the award to Ahtna.
OUTCOME: Client (contractor) prevailed
Kansas Power & Light Co. sued the general contractor who built an earthen dam in Manhattan Kansas when it failed after construction. The contractor prevailed and a 6 week jury trial and sought recovery ... of its costs and fees. The court ruled in the contractor's favor on the costs and fees, but reduced the cost bill.
OUTCOME: Client (subcontractor) did not prevail
Subcontractor sought recovery when materials specified in the contract documents were not commercially available. The court held that the materials were commercially available.
Ad
Transform legal challenges into solutions.
Connect now to review your situation.
