On November 21, the Washington State Supreme Court held that general contractors may be on the hook for the injuries of the workers on their jobsites (Vargas v. Inland Washington, LLC). And not just on the hook to provide a safe jobsite for all, but for the injuries of its subcontractor’s workers. And not on … Continue Reading
This article was originally published in the Vancouver Business Journal. When businesses open a letter from Northwest Riverwatcher (a fictional environmental group) with the subject line “Notice of Intent to Sue Under the Clean Water Act,” the tendency, particularly among smaller businesses, is to ignore it and hope Riverwatcher goes away. There may be a … Continue Reading
ORS 105.682 provides immunity from contract or tort claims to landowners who permit the public the use of their lands for recreational purposes. Under that statutory provision, a recreational user or the estate of such a user cannot sue the landowner if that user suffers personal injury, death, or property damage from the use of the … Continue Reading
Chances are that if you live in or have visited California, you have seen conspicuously placed “WARNING” signs notifying you that a product you are consuming or a location you are entering “contains chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm.” Now, following a March 30, … Continue Reading
Bonding around mechanics liens can be an efficient way to close out a project when disputes arise, but case law and statutes created some ticklish questions about who needed to be included in any subsequent lawsuit. Now, the Washington Supreme Court has given us some clarity. In Inland Empire Dry Wall Supply Co. v. Western … Continue Reading
On May 10, 2017, the Oregon Court of Appeals made several significant holdings in the appeal of an insurance policy garnishment proceeding. The court of appeals held that a liability insurer’s exclusion for multi-unit new residential construction was ambiguous and, when construed against the insurer, did not apply to defeat coverage for construction-defect claims in … Continue Reading
This article was originally posted on The Northwest Policyholder, Miller Nash Graham & Dunn’s insurance coverage blog. Contractors, builders, real estate managers, and others should be aware of a March 9, 2017, decision by an Oregon federal judge who found that carbon monoxide is included in the plain meaning of “pollutant” as defined in a … Continue Reading
On October 26, 2016, the Oregon Court of Appeals reversed a general judgment and money award in favor of a general contractor because (1) the general contractor had failed to support its claim for damages for bonding and insurance costs with sufficient evidence, and (2) the money award improperly included a contractual markup on costs … Continue Reading
General contractors and other employers (even some owners) have greater exposure under Oregon’s Employer Liability Law (the “ELL”) to injured workers based on the recent Oregon Supreme Court decision in Yeatts v. Polygon Northwest Co. The ELL imposes liability on all “owners, contractors or subcontractors and other persons having charge of, or responsibility for,” work … Continue Reading
On August 10, 2016, the Oregon Court of Appeals issued a decision on an implied easement claim, finding that the lack of evidence regarding the use of the easement before the initial conveyance of the benefited property was not fatal to the claim. Dayton v. Jordan, 280 Or App 236 (2016). In Dayton, the parties own abutting … Continue Reading
A Ninth Circuit panel reversed a district court’s denial of a smelter owner’s motion to dismiss, holding that the owner/operator of a facility that emits airborne hazardous substances cannot be held liable as an arranger for disposal under CERCLA. The case involves a smelter owned and operated by Teck Cominco Metals, Ltd., and located about ten … Continue Reading
The Oregon Supreme Court recently affirmed a decision by the Bureau of Labor & Industries (“BOLI”) holding a successor business owner liable for the unpaid wages of its predecessor. Blachana, LLC v. Bureau of Labor & Indus., No. S060789 (Or Jan. 16, 2014).… Continue Reading
Large businesses operating in multiple states received the green light to litigate their civil disputes in their home jurisdiction regardless of where the construction project is located. This decision could likewise serve as a serious threat to mom-and-pop subcontractors that provide most of the labor and materials for a project but typically lack any negotiating … Continue Reading
On August 30, 2013, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a groundbreaking decision, requiring an insurance company that has issued comprehensive general liability policies to defend a policyholder that has received an information request from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) under Section 104(e) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”). See … Continue Reading
A general contractor cannot offset the cost of defective work performed by a subcontractor if the subcontractor sues to recover unpaid fees after being terminated for convenience. According to a new Oregon case, termination for convenience denies the subcontractor an opportunity to cure any defects before it has completed its work and therefore cuts off … Continue Reading
A broadly worded exterior insulation and finish system (EIFS) exclusion in your policy may cancel your coverage. In a recent case, the U.S. District Court in Washington granted an insurance company’s motion to dismiss since the building that was the source of the claim had an EIFS exterior even though the defective work was unrelated … Continue Reading
In an October 16, 2012, blog entry, we noted that the Oregon Court of Appeals reversed an inverse condemnation award against the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). On March 28, 2013, the Oregon Supreme Court has allowed a petition for review in an appeal of Hall v. ODOT, A146386, October 3, 2012.… Continue Reading
At what point does a local government lose its ability to withdraw a decision that has been appealed to the Land Use Board of Appeals (“LUBA”)? It has long been clear that under ORS 197.830(13)(b) a local government can, as of right, obtain from LUBA a voluntary remand of a decision after a notice of … Continue Reading
