February 25, 2008

EDITOR'S NOTES

The advent of e-mail dates back to the mid 1960s when programmers at MIT devised a way for multiple users of a mainframe computer system to electronically communicate with each other. What began as an electronic Post-It note has since morphed into a global phenomenon that now permeates every aspect of business and has turned the world into a global community. With its acceptance comes legal scrutiny.

This week’s first case calls into question the legally binding nature of an e-mailed purchase order. A subcontractor received the terms and conditions of a roofing purchase order via e-mail, and then received the official hard copy document a few days later. It wasn’t until a dispute arose that the subcontractor questioned a portion of the document, which was missing in the original e-mail but present in the hard copy. Was the subcontractor bound by the terms listed in the e-mail or by the more complete hard copy? An Illinois appeals court determined that the hard copy rules govern the agreement.

The ASBCA was called upon to sort out the difference between materials and equipment when a contractor and Army Corps of Engineers disagreed on reimbursement costs for mats that rotted during a work suspension.

State courts often research what other states have said about an issue that it perhaps has not previously considered. The Iowa Supreme Court did just that when it reconsidered its stance on implied warranties on home construction.

Finally, if you're a contractor, construction manager, design/builder or construction consultant, you won't want to miss the next audio conference on the Roadmap to BIM 2008, scheduled for March 5. John Jurewicz delves into the details of BIM applications and technology. Visit constructionclaims.com for more information.

Subscribers: click here for the full story

Non-Subscribers: click here to subscribe