May 7, 2007

EDITOR'S NOTES

When a project owner elects to utilize multiple prime contractors, the biggest additional liability exposure the owner assumes is exposure to contractor claims for delay and improper scheduling and coordination. But one public owner was able to successfully shift that risk and responsibility to the contractors themselves, to the detriment of the general building contractor on the school project.

In another case, a subcontractor was unable to purchase either of the specified products from the exclusive distributors of those products. The distributors did not like the fact the sub had failed to request pre-bid price quotations. A Minnesota court was asked to decide whether there had been antitrust violations.

The federal government has become increasingly aggressive in responding to contractor claims with counterclaims for violations of the False Claims Act. But just because a claim was denied on the merits and an expert’s methodology was rejected did not mean the claim was necessarily “false.”

This week we continue our two-part article on professional standards of care by Dr. Malcolm Lewis. Dr. Lewis explores the recent history of some standard of care issues, as well as new technologies and future implications.

Subscribers: click here for the full story

Non-Subscribers: click here to subscribe