Litigation

  • September 23, 2021

Rhode Island’s Amended Joint Tortfeasor Causes Increased Certainty in the Settlement of Multi-Party Negligence Matters

Litigation, RI Statute Update

Anyone who has handled tort claims in Rhode Island, including personal injury and negligence matters, knows that the resolution of these claims is complicated by the presence of multiple defendants.  These complications come by way of parties arguing for differing levels of responsibility—if any, conflicting theories of defense, and the classic “deep pocket” defendant who is often asked to carry the weight of the “judgment-proof” one.  Handling these claims was not made any simpler or less confusing by reviewing Rhode Island’s previous version of its enactment of the Uniform Contribution Among Tortfeasors Act, G.L. 1956 § 10-6-1 et seq.; however, recent amendments have made Rhode Island’s law more consistent with liability practices in other states.  This should make handling tort claims in Rhode Island more familiar to construction companies, insurance carriers, and their legal counsel.

The law recently changed with the passage of two bills through both houses of Rhode Island’s General Assembly, which became effective July 14, 2021.  In short, after these

Continue Reading...
  • August 11, 2021

Intentional Deletion and Manipulation of Electronic Data Leads to Default Judgment

Discovery, Litigation, RI Case Law Update, Sanctions

Every day we are reminded that we live in a digital world by looking down at our smartphones and logging onto our computers. Though the legal field is generally slow to jump on the bandwagon of new technology, the use of technology has crept its way into the discovery process, where the production of information commonly comes from electronic sources. As easily as this information can be obtained and stored on our devices, it can also be deleted. Thus, it is extremely important that parties involved in litigation be aware of the consequences that stem from failing to preserve electronically stored information. Recently, a defendant in a case involving fraud and conversion was made painfully aware of these consequences by having a default judgment entered against it for intentionally deleting electronically stored information prior to handing it over to the plaintiff during discovery.

In its complaint, Atalian brought claims against several defendants alleging fraud and conversion. During discovery, Atalian filed a motion for sanctions against

Continue Reading...
  • December 15, 2020

The Massachusetts Statute of Repose Comes Marching One Building at a Time

Litigation, MA Case Update

Have you ever wondered when Massachusetts’ 6-year statute of repose for defective design, planning and construction is triggered when dealing with the construction of a multi-building, multi-year condominium construction project?  

If you haven’t thought about such an issue that’s okay, neither had the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, nor the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts.  However, luckily for us, the Supreme Judicial Court recently tackled this very question in D’Allessandro v. Lennar Hingham Holdings, LLC, 156 N.E.3d 197, 198 (Mass. 2020).

Photo from the Hewitts Landing Condominium website, found at https://www.livehewittslanding.com/hingham/hewitts-landing/photos/

In D’Allessandro, the Hewitts Landing Condominium project (the “Project”) consisted of 150 condominium units and twenty-eight buildings. D’Allessandro, 156 N.E.3d at 199.  The Project was built over the course of twenty four different phases between 2008 and 2015; however, as individual units were

Continue Reading...
  • March 25, 2020

Project Suspended or Payment Delays? Don’t Lose Your Mechanic’s Lien Rights!

COVID-19, Litigation, RI Mechanic's Lien, Risk Management

While many construction projects are advancing in a safe manner during the COVID-19 pandemic, some have been suspended by governmental order, like the Cities of Boston and Cambridge, or based upon the direction of the Owner and/or general contractor.

In a recent survey by the AGC (March 17-19), 28% of the respondents reported a project delay ordered by owners and/or governmental bodies.  Of the delays and disruptions, respondents reported various causes including:

    • 16% material/equipment shortage
    • 11% labor shortages (including subcontractor laborers)
    • 18% labor shortages from authorities having jurisdiction (AHJ) for inspections, permits, certificates of occupancy

(The AGC is proving to be an invaluable resource with a 8 part webinar series on COVID-19 related issues plus excellent e-blasts and an online resource page.  Locally, the AGC of Massachusetts and CIM are also on the forefront of COVID-19 related construction industry issues.  I encourage you

Continue Reading...
  • December 13, 2019

Claims against RIDOT – Important Judicial Decisions in 2019

Litigation, RI Case Law Update

The Rhode Island Superior Court came down with a few interesting decisions this year concerning Rhode Island General Law Section 37-13.1-1.  That statute deals with actions against the State of Rhode Island on Highway and Public Works contracts.  The statute provides in part:

  • 37-13.1-1. Suits allowed – Jurisdiction – Statute of limitations – Procedure.   (a) Any person, firm, or corporation which is awarded a contract subsequent to July 1, 1977, with the state of Rhode Island, acting through any of its departments, commissions, or other agencies, for the design, construction, repair, or alteration of any state highway, bridge, or public works other than those contracts which are covered by the public works arbitration act may, in the event of any disputed claims under the contract, bring an action against the state of Rhode Island in the superior court for Providence county for the purpose of having the claims determined, provided notice of the general nature of the claims shall have been given
Continue Reading...
  • October 29, 2019

Condominium Mechanic’s Liens

Litigation, MA Mechanic's Lien

Mechanic’s lien claims are complex in that each state’s statutes differ dramatically.  There are certain unique issues when a contractor seeks to commence a mechanic’s lien proceeding for improvements made to a condominium.

What did you improve?

When assessing your rights under the applicable mechanic’s lien statute, focus on the property that you improved.  You are only entitled to lien the property interests for which you made an improvement.

For condominiums, there are common areas and units.  The common areas are owned by the condominium trust/association and the units are owned by the individual owners.  This year, I commenced a mechanic’s lien action on behalf of a subcontractor against a new, 10-unit condominium in Rhode Island.  My client performed improvements to the entire building — both common areas and in the units.  The general contractor was hired by the developer of the condominium. By the time final payments were not released some of the units were transferred to

Continue Reading...
  • October 22, 2019

The Intersection of Workers’ Compensation Immunity and Contractual Indemnity

Contract Documents, Indemnity, Litigation, Risk Management

The workers’ compensation statute in many states provides that the workers’ compensation benefits received by an injured employee is the employee’s exclusive remedy.  The benefits are paid based on a no-fault basis and the injured employee is barred from bringing a lawsuit against his or her employer.  The degree in which the exclusive remedy provision applies varies in different jurisdictions.  An ABA 50-State Survey on the exclusive remedy provisions can be found by clicking HERE.

In many construction contracts, a contractor indemnifies an owner for personal injury and property damage caused by the contractor’s negligence.

Here is the fact scenario:  A contractor’s employee gets injured on a jobsite.  The employee receives workers’ compensation benefits but has incurred additional damages beyond those benefits.  The contractor employee cannot bring a lawsuit against the his employer based on the workers’ compensation exclusive remedy provision, but the employee may bring a lawsuit against the owner for the personal injury damages.  Owner

Continue Reading...
  • October 05, 2019

Clawback Agreements – Friend or Foe?

Discovery, Litigation

As construction attorneys, we are no strangers to voluminous productions of client documents and communications, both in electronic and hardcopy formats, during discovery. Even with proper safeguards in place during document review, there exists the possibility that some privileged material may accidentally slip over to an opposing party.  Production of such material to a third party, especially an adversary, runs the risk of waiving attorney-client privilege or attorney work product privilege.

Rule 502(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence creates somewhat of a safety net for inadvertent disclosures, but requires compliance with a number of steps. Fed. R. Evid. 502(b) (“disclosure does not operate as a waiver in a federal or state proceeding if: (1) the disclosure is inadvertent; (2) the holder of the privilege or protection took reasonable steps to prevent disclosure; and (3) the holder promptly took reasonable steps to rectify the error, including (if applicable) following Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 (b)(5)(B) [concerning inadvertent production of trial preparation materials].”) Note also that

Continue Reading...
  • September 25, 2019

Taking an Out of State Deposition in Rhode Island Just Got Easier!

Discovery, Litigation, RI Statute Update

On July 15, 2019, the Uniform Interstate Depositions and Discovery Act (the “Uniform Act”) was enacted in Rhode Island. R.I. Gen. Laws 9-18.1-1 et seq.  It will simplify the process of taking a deposition in Rhode Island for actions pending outside Rhode Island.  In enacting this legislation, Rhode Island joins 33 other states in adopting the uniform legislation.

Fact Scenario

You have a construction litigation matter pending in Vermont, but the architect of the project is from Rhode Island.  You want to take the architect’s deposition.  How do you go about taking the architect’s deposition?

Process Pursuant to the Previous Statute

The Vermont counsel wishing to take the deposition must provide a commission or some instruction from the Vermont trial court granting permission to take the out of state deposition.  Vermont counsel then had to retain local counsel licensed to practice in Rhode Island to commence a miscellaneous

Continue Reading...
  • September 18, 2019

Corporate Deposition — Multiple Witnesses At the Same Time?

30(b)(6) Depositions, Discovery, FRCP Rule Update, Litigation

A few years ago, I represented a process piping subcontractor in a claim against the general contractor and the owner of a coal fired power plant in Massachusetts.  While the case was unique and interesting in a number of ways, some of which may be the subject of future posts, one aspect that was new for me was taking a Rule 30(b)(6) corporate deposition of two individuals at the same time.

Rule 30(b)(6) depositions are depositions of a corporation or other business entity.  It is the corporation that is testifying.  These depositions can be helpful to obtain testimony of the corporation that will be binding on the corporation at the time of trial.  They also impose an obligation to prepare and educate the individuals who testify on behalf of the corporation — to learn what information the “corporation knows” which is often beyond one person’s personal knowledge.  The corporation designates individuals to testify for the corporation on a list of topics provided by the party noticing

Continue Reading...