At an upcoming panel discussion about federal government contracting, AHC attorney David Cook’s portion will focus on subcontractors and trade contractors. The legal issues and… Read More »Subcontractor Claims on Federal Government Projects
Must a subcontractor’s claim of lien identify the contractor in order to be valid? In the recent case of Robertson v. Ridge Environmental, LLC, the… Read More »Subcontractor’s Lien Upheld Despite Not Identifying Contractor
When a cleaning contractor failed to pay its employees for cleaning services at a university, its employees sued the Board of Regents (BOR), asserting various… Read More »Public Owner Not Liable for Forged Non-Statutory Bond
In February 2012, the Court of Appeals issued an opinion that provides guidance to property managers in avoiding liability for debts unpaid by property owners. Read More »Apartment Property Managers Avoid Agent Liability
Surety bonds offer security to owners, contractors, subcontractors, and others for performance of work and payment therefor. Both payment and performance bonds provide a sense of comfort to parties that rely on bonded parties. But before relying on surety bonds, parties should make sure the terms of the bond match reality.
A recent Georgia case illustrates the importance of checking the terms of surety bonds to ensure they identify and correctly name the parties, especially the bonded principal.Read More »Surety Bond Lesson: Properly Identify the Parties
Sometimes construction claimants and their attorneys need to think outside the box in their efforts to recover payment for work. There are many situations in which claimants adequately prove they are entitled to recover, but for one reason or another they are not made whole. For instance, the counterparty may become insolvent or dissolved, or a mere breach-of-contract action is inadequate to recover for all losses. In these situations, claimants must find alternative claims for recovery and other pockets from which to recover. Read More »The Creative-But-High Standard of “Alternative” Claims in Construction Disputes
Many contractors and subcontractors fear the unpredictable costs of litigating their claims. This is especially the case if the claim is small. In some instances, the uncertainty of legal fees and consultant costs can cause them to forego asserting their claims altogether. They may not realize, however, that if their contract incorporates the AAA Construction Industry Arbitration Rules (“AAA Rules”), they may have an arbitration provision that promotes prompt and cost-efficient claims resolution.
Depending on the characteristics of a claim, the AAA ConsRead More »Fast Track Arbitration as a Vehicle for Resolving Small Claims
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
The Georgia Supreme Court recently affirmed a trial court’s order requiring a city to pay a developer for the construction of a sewage pump station. The case involves issues of mandamus and the enforcement of ordinances.Read More »Supreme Court Upholds Mandamus Order Requiring City to Pay Developer For Construction of Pump Station
In November 2010, the Georgia Court of Appeals interpreted the Georgia Prompt Pay Act to mandate the recovery of reasonable attorney fees to a prevailing party.
The Prompt Pay Act
Georgia’s Prompt Pay Act (the “Act”) generally provides additional remedies to a contractor or subcontractor where they perform construction work on property and the owner of the property fails to remit payment within statutory deadlines. Where the Act applies, it provides for an award of attorney fees and interest on late payments. In Electric Works CMA, Inc. v. Baldwin Technical Fabrics, Inc., the court explained that attorney fees are recoverable without the necessity of showing bad faith.Read More »Recovery of Attorney Fees and Interest Under The Georgia Prompt Pay Act
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