In an article in the Atlanta Business Chronicle, insurance advisor Douglas Rieder explains why he is optimistic for 2013. His reasons include anecdotal evidence of… Read More »Article: Optimism for the Construction Industry in 2013
Read the opinion here: Case – ArcherWestern v Pitts
Construction owners occasionally use an Owner Controlled Insurance Program (OCIP) to insure personal and property damage on their projects. The Georgia Supreme Court recently interpreted the City of Atlanta’s OCIP for construction of the Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport. After a sub-subcontractor’s employee was killed on the project, his estate sued the City of Atlanta and several contractors, alleging that they failed to ensure the subcontractor at fault maintained the level of insurance required by the OCIP program. Instead of the required $10,000,000 in bodily-injury coverage, the subcontractor at fault maintained only $1,000,000 in coverage. Read More »Ga. Supreme Court Interprets Intent and Scope of Atlanta’s OCIP
Many construction-related contracts contain a contractual period of limitations — a contract term that establishes a period of time during which a party must file a claim against the other party (“limitations provision”). Such a contractual provision precludes an aggrieved party from filing a lawsuit after the period expires. They are generally enforceable in Georgia.
In Carrier Corp. v. Rollins, Inc., the Court of Appeals of Georgia interpreted a limitations provision contained in a $2 million contract for installation of an HVAC system at the owner’s headquarters. The owner filed suit alleging that the HVAC system installed by the contractor never functioned properly. Read More »Contractual Limitations Period Must Have Clearly Identifiable Starting Point
Non-payment can place contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers in a precarious cash-flow situation. On most jobs, they outlay their capital and hard work in advance of payment by the owner. They rely on the owner to pay the correct amount at the time provided in the agreement. When private owners fail to pay, contractors, subcontractors, and some suppliers can generally resort to filing liens to encourage payment. As one case illustrates, liens do not always provide adequate security of payment. Read More »Lien Priority: Not Always Just a Matter of Filing
In November 2011, the Georgia Supreme Court broadly interpreted Georgia’s anti-indemnity statute to preclude a developer’s indemnity claim against a homeowners’ association. Read More »Georgia Supreme Court Invalidates Construction-Related Indemnity Provision
After many of the recent storms crossing Georgia, residential roofing contractors became increasingly involved with assisting homeowners in procuring the necessary repairs to storm-damaged roofs. Contractors negotiated with insurance companies, provided documentation to insurance companies, and ultimately performed the necessary repairs to the storm-damaged roofs. In 2011, the Georgia General Assembly amended the Georgia Fair Business Practices Act in a manner that will directly impact these residential roofing contractors.
Read More »New Residential Roofing Law Impacts Roofing Contracts and Marketing
Many vendors to state and local governments (such as contractors, subcontractors, and architects) market their services to public officials and governmental employees. But they rarely consider such marketing efforts to be lobbying, nor would they consider themselves to be lobbyists. Before the recent amendments to the Ethics in Government Act (the “Act”), they may have unwittingly qualified as lobbyists — and in violation of the Act.
In the 2011 Regular Session, the Georgia General Assembly enacted the Illegal Immigration Reform and Enforcement Act of 2011. The purpose of the Act was to increase compliance — and punish non-compliance — with the federal E-Verify program. While the most notorious portion of the Act requires certain employers to confirm the legal immigration and employment status of employees, it specifically addresses public works construction.
A prior AHC Construction Law Alert discussed the 2010 and 2006 revisions to Georgia law governing employment verification. The Act clarifies existing rules and establishes new rules governing public contractors, and their subcontractors, that contract with public owners for the “physical performance of services.”
Autry, Hall & Cook, LLP provides clients a broad variety of high quality legal services while retaining the personal touch and more economical rates of a small firm.
North Atlanta Office
(Vinings)
3330 Cumberland Boulevard
Suite 185
Atlanta, GA 30339
Northeast Atlanta Office
(Tucker)
100 Crescent Centre Parkway
Suite 625
Tucker, GA 30084
Copyright 2020 Autry, Hall & Cook, LLP
Disclaimer
The text and materials on the Autry, Hall & Cook internet site are for informational purposes only and are not legal advice. This internet site is not intended to create, and receipt of the information on this site does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between you and Autry, Hall & Cook. You should not act upon the information contained in this internet site without seeking the advice of an attorney. Please do not send us any confidential information until after you have received from us a written statement that we have agreed to perform the legal services you requested.
Hosting by Southern Web