Category Archives: Law Notes

Contributory Negligence on the construction project (law note)

Posted on by

scale of justiceI’m sometimes asked if the percentage of “fault” is something that a client can rely on to reduce the amount of money they may owe on construction project gone bad.  The short answer:  no.   As I mentioned in my post on joint & several liability, if you are even 1% liable for the damages on a project, you can be hit with 100% of the damages. 

 This is not true in many other jurisdictions, where proportional fault (called comparative negligence) is often allowed.  In those states, if you are found 20% liable, you only have to pay 20% of the damages. Not so in North Carolina.  Here, unless you are entirely passively negligent (a concept we’ll discuss next week), you may be on the hook for the full amount.

That’s not fair!

Perhaps.  But, that’s life on a North Carolina construction project.  One concept that helps to reduce the unfairness factor is the concept of contributory negligence.  In North Carolina (but few other states), if a party is negligent at all (even 1%), they cannot recover from another negligent party.  

For example:  the owner of a project sues its general contractor on a project for a late project delivery which costs the owner money.  While almost all of the delay was the contractor’s fault, the owner also caused delay by failing to deliver owner-furnished equipment in time to meet the critical path of the project.  The owner’s own failure means that the owner itself is contributorily negligent and, under North Carolina law, the owner cannot recover the rest of its damages from the contractor.

But wait! There’s more.

Before you get too excited about contributory negligence, you need to understand the concept of  jury nullification.  When contributory negligence is explained to a jury, the jury may sometimes decide not to find fault where they might otherwise apportion fault, to avoid what they perceive as an unjust result. 

In the above example, the jury might decide the owner’s failure was not really contributing to the delay after all, and therefore award the owner damages.  This is called jury nullification, and it can take the sting out of contributory negligence.

Change to NC’s Contributory Negligence law?

The concept of contributory negligence (and its complete bar to any recovery) is one which many would like to change.  There has been legislation in the NC General Assembly in recent years to abolish contributory negligence in favor of a comparative-fault  negligence, as is common in most states.  So far, this has not happened.  As they say, however, the jury is still out on whether such a change will occur.  

Do you have an opinion on contributory negligence vs. comparative negligence? Think NC’s law should change to one based on percentage of fault?  Share in the comments below.

———————

Photo “Scale—Image”  by Matthias Kulka/Corbis via Picasa/Creative Commons License. 



Arbitrators are not King Solomon?

Posted on by

whoa signAfter my recent post on the pros and cons of court vs. arbitration, I was contacted by the American Arbitration Association (AAA).    They told me that, contrary to what is a widely held belief about panels “splitting the baby,” their internal studies actually show that is not, in fact, the case.   The summary of their findings is worth reading.

Now, I don’t know the particulars of their study protocol, and AAA is certainly not a disinterested party, but the numbers are impressive.  Perhaps AAA arbitration panels, at least, are not King Solomon.

Do you have a AAA arbitration experience?  Share it in the comments below.

————–

Photo “whoa” by stgermh via Flickr/Creative Commons license.

Should I stay or should I go now? (Court vs. Arbitration)- Updated

Posted on by

gavelShould I stay or should I go now?
If I go there will be trouble
And if I stay it will be double
So come on and let me know!

Are you wondering whether Court or Arbitration should be made a standard part of your construction contracts?  With apologies in advance to The Clash, there is “trouble” to be found in either venue.

Some companies, and their lawyers, insist that American Aribtration Association (AAA) Arbitration is the only way to go.  Others prefer to take their chances in a local state court.  Who is right?  Neither, and both.  As with anything, there is a cost-benefit analysis that you should go through prior to making either a standard part of your construction contract.

Pluses and Minuses of Going to Court

If a dispute is brought in court, there is a standard, fully vetted set of statutes, case law, court rules, and procedures already in place.  A judge, unlike the typical arbitration panel, is generally more willing to consider defenses based on statue, such as the statute of limitations or the statute of repose.  Summary Judgment, in which a judge will (on occasion) grant a judgment for or against  a party without the necessity of the full blown jury trial, is possible.  Such dispositive, procedural rulings are extremely unlikely to be granted by an arbitration panel.

On the other hand, a court trial means a jury verdict.  Unless the parties agree to waive their right to a jury trial, your case will be decided by true laymen who may have never set foot on a construction site before, and who will not understand the RFI, change order, and pay app process.  Terms like “substantial completion,” “critical path,” and “standard of care” will be foreign to them.

I’ve seen some juries get it right, and I’ve seen some get it wrong.  Most jurors take their responsibilities extremely seriously and will try to apply the law as the judge instructs them.  But at the end of the day, you have people unfamiliar with industry standards determining your case.

Pluses and Minuses of Arbitration

Many standard construction contracts contain arbitration provisions, generally AAA Arbitration.  The typical arbitration includes a three member panel of experts (construction professionals, designers, construction attorneys) who hear the evidence and make a ruling.  That ruling has the full force of law.The reasoning behind such arbitration clauses is that industry professionals better understand the construction process, standards of care, and interrelationships on a complex construction project.  Theoretically, therefore, they are better able to determine the true root cause of damages or delay.

Arbitration is sometimes considered to be less expensive and less time consuming than a court trial.  The arbitration panel generally sets fairly loose procedural and evidentiary boundaries, and tends to allow into evidence things that might not meet the strict Rules of Evidence that a court would apply.  Some of these generalities, however, have not proven to be true in practice.  AAA Arbitration can be costly– the filing of a claim alone is costlier than typical court fees.  Case managers add a layer of bureaucracy to the process.   Arbitration panels also generally are more prone to “split the baby” in a close case.

Which is Better?

The answer to that question is a clear and concise, “it depends.”  It depends on the facts of your particular case, the jurisdiction you are in, the type of panel you may get, and numerous other things completely out of your control.  Consult with a lawyer in your jurisdiction to discuss the pros and cons of each, and which may be right for your particular situation.

Do you have experience with court or arbitration?  Personal preference?  I’d love to hear your thoughts on the subject in the comment section below.

UPDATE 10/13/2010:  The AAA responded to this article citing their internal studies showing arbitration panels do not often “split the baby”.  See more here. 

_______________

Photo “Courtroom One Gavel” by Joe Gratz via Flickr/Creative Commons license.

Liquidated Damages: what, when, & why

Posted on by

water dropWhat are Liquidated Damages?

Liquidated Damages are a sum which a party to a contract agrees to pay or a deposit he agrees to forfeit, if he breaks some promise.  In the construction realm, liquidated damages (or “LDs”) usually involve money damages for time delays on a construction project.    Typically, a contract will state that time is “of the essence” and that for every day past the scheduled completion date (as modified by change orders & directives) a set amount is due from the contractor to the owner.

When can you get liquidated damages? (or, when must you pay liquidated damages?)

Liquidated damages must be specified in the contract up front.  They should reflect the reasonable estimate of likely damages that will be incurred if the contractor fails to complete the project timely.

To be enforceable, the amount must have been arrived at by a good-faith effort to estimate in advance the actual damage that would likely ensue from the breach, and they cannot be deemed “penalties.”  Eastern Carolina Internal Medicine, P.A. v. Faidas,  149 N.C.App. 940,  564 S.E.2d 53 (2002).

Why?

The purpose of liquidated damages is to reasonably compensate the non-breaching party (typically, the owner for construction delays) which it will likely incur as a result of the breach (e.g., the extended completion date results in lost rent and increase finance charges).  Without the liquidated damages provision, the parties would be forced to argue about each alleged cost the owner incurred because of the delay.  With liquidated damages, the amount is known ahead of time which should (theoretically) lead to fewer arguments later.

When doesn’t the provision work?

Two words—concurrent delay.  If the owner is delaying the project (through, for example, failure to deliver/install owner-provided equipment), but the contractor is also behind on completion, the two delays may run at the same time—hence “concurrent delay”.  In such a situation it becomes difficult if not altogether impossible to separate delays and delay damages.  Of course, if the entire delay is owner-related, no liquidated damages can be assessed.

Take-away message

Liquidated damage provisions, if carefully and properly drafted, are enforced in North Carolina.  You should know your schedule requirements prior to signing on the dotted line and, if necessary, accelerate your work to complete on time.  If you are the owner, however, you also have responsibilities not to interfere with the schedule if you hope to have a chance at recovering liquidated damages from a contractor who delivers a project late.

Questions?  Comments?  Experience with the joys (and sorrows) of LDs?  Share in the comments below.

 __________________________

Photo “Water drop bouncing off the water surface” by konradc via Picasa/Creative Commons License.

What is Indemnity, and why should you care?

Posted on by

barber shop poleIf you have ever asked a lawyer to review your construction contracts (and you should have), you may have noticed that lawyers get very excited over the indemnity provisions that may or may not be in the contracts you are contemplating signing.  What are indemnity provisions, and why should you care?

What is it?

Quite simply, an indemnity provision is a statement that one of the parties agrees to pay any sums the other party might otherwise be legally required to pay to a third party.  Now that I’ve mentioned picking up someone else’s tab, I hope I have your attention.  As you might imagine, an indemnity provision can be a costly item, so you should have a thorough understanding of what such a provision means.

In general, indemnity provisions are contractual, and contract rules concerning them apply.  What that means is, if the contract says you will pay for the owner/builder/developer/designer’s legal liabilities to others, you may have to open the checkbook.

Common Indemnity Provision

An example of one type of indemnity provision is AIA A201 3.18.1, which states:

To the fullest extent permitted by law the Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless the Owner, Architect, Architect’s consultants, and agents and employees of any of them from and against claims, damages, losses and expenses, including but not limited to attorneys’ fees, arising out of or resulting from performance of the Work, provided that such claim, damage, loss or expense is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, disease or death, or to injury to or destruction of tangible property (other than the Work itself), but only to the extent caused by the negligent acts or omissions of the Contractor, a Subcontractor, anyone directly or indirectly employed by them or anyone for whose acts they may be liable, regardless of whether or not such claim, damage, loss or expense is caused in part by a party indemnified hereunder. . . .

When is it not legal?

There are some exceptions to the general applicability of indemnity provisions in North Carolina—most noticeably: you cannot be indemnified against your own negligence.  If an indemnity provision purports to indemnify one party against that person’s own negligence, public policy and state law prohibit such an indemnification in North Carolina  The applicable statute N.C. Gen. Stat. §22B-1, which reads:

§ 22B-1. Construction indemnity agreements invalid

Any promise or agreement in, or in connection with, a contract or agreement relative to the design, planning, construction, alteration, repair or maintenance of a building, structure, highway, road, appurtenance or appliance, including moving, demolition and excavating connected therewith, purporting to indemnify or hold harmless the promisee, the promisee’s independent contractors, agents, employees, or indemnitees against liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to persons or damage to property proximately caused by or resulting from the negligence, in whole or in part, of the promisee, its independent contractors, agents, employees, or indemnitees, is against public policy and is void and unenforceable. Nothing contained in this section shall prevent or prohibit a contract, promise or agreement whereby a promisor shall indemnify or hold harmless any promisee or the promisee’s independent contractors, agents, employees or indemnitees against liability for damages resulting from the sole negligence of the promisor, its agents or employees.
[Emphasis added].

However, construction indemnity clauses indemnifying a party for its own negligence can be valid and enforceable so long as the offending portion of the indemnity clause can be redacted (that is, stricken from the paragraph).  Vecellio & Grogan, Inc. v. Piedmont Drilling & Blasting, Inc., 183 N.C.App. 66, 644 S.E.2d 16 (2007).  In the example of the AIA A207 provision above, the phrase “To the fullest extent permitted by law” acts to keep the phrase within the permissible parameters of North Carolina law.  Therefore, if you signed a contract with such a provision, you may be on the hook.

Be Careful with Indemnity Provisions

Not all indemnity provisions are equal.  Some, such as in the above example, make attorney fees part of the expense which is passed along.  Others expressly exclude attorney fees.  Some provisions include a “duty to defend” on behalf of the other party, while others are silent on that issue.  What is most important is that you recognize that such language is extremely important and should be discussed in detail with your knowledgeable construction lawyer.

As with getting your hair cut, you could do it yourself, but should you?

________________________________

Photo “Barber Shop Pole” by MyEyeSees via Flickr/Creative Commons License.