Ad
related to: construction disputes cases
Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In 1975 Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital in Greensboro, North Carolina, contracted with Mercury to build a new wing.The contract, drafted by the hospital's attorneys, vested most dispute resolution authority, relating to aesthetic matters, in the project's architect, J.N. Pease Associates of Charlotte, with the opportunity to go to arbitration if the architect did not rule on the dispute within ...
The school district’s audit is “filled with false information, lack of thoroughness, mathematical errors, and even some apparently spoon-fed irrelevant speculation,” the firm’s attorney ...
United States v. Utah Construction & Mining Company, 384 U.S. 394 (1966), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that "(w)hen an administrative agency is acting in a judicial capacity and resolves disputed issues of fact properly before it which the parties have had an adequate opportunity to litigate, the courts have not hesitated to apply res judicata to enforce repose."
When a dispute arose under the contract, the Texas corporation filed suit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, invoking that court's diversity jurisdiction. [3] The Petitioner moved to dismiss the suit on the grounds that venue was "wrong" under 28 U.S.C. 1406(a) and "improper" under Federal Rule of Civil ...
This is especially useful when the subject matter of the dispute is highly technical: arbitrators with an appropriate degree of expertise (for example, quantity surveying expertise, in the case of a construction dispute, or expertise in commercial property law, in the case of a real estate dispute [8]) can be chosen.
The Forum on Construction Law of the American Bar Association established in 1973 is the largest organization of construction lawyers in the United States. [19] The group includes law firms of every size, solo practitioners, in-house and government counsel, non-lawyers such as, construction professionals and the public sector representatives.
Moylist Construction Limited v Doheny, [2016] IESC 9, [2016] 2 IR 283 was an Irish Supreme Court case in which the Supreme Court confirmed the Irish courts’ jurisdiction to strike out (dismiss) weak cases—those it considered “bound to fail."
Connally v. General Construction Co., 269 U.S. 385 (1926), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court expanded and established key constructs of the Fourteenth Amendment's due process doctrine along with establishing the vagueness doctrine. It defined necessary requirements that are fundamental to any law, which, when ...
Ad
related to: construction disputes cases