“Additional Insureds” and “Your Work Exclusions” and “Subcontractor Exceptions”…Oh My!

IMG_0302The Arizona Court of Appeals recently issued an opinion in Double AA Builders, Ltd. v. Preferred Contractors Insurance Company, LLC., No. 1 CA-CV 15-0375, which addresses several key construction-related commercial general liability insurance policy (“CGL”) provisions.  The court ultimately held that the subject CGL policy did not provide the general contractor (who was an additional insured) more and/or different coverage than the subcontractor (who was the named insured).  As a result, the court found that the General Contractor was not insured for the loss at issue.  But in reaching its decision, the court examined the concepts of “additional insureds,” ” your work exclusions,” and “subcontractor exceptions” in connection with CGL policies.  For this reason, Double AA Builders  is a particularly interesting case. read more

Construction Contract Provisions that are Statutorily Void and Unenforceable in Arizona

sign-40599_150In an earlier post, I addressed the statutorily-required minimum elements of Arizona construction contracts between contractors and property owners.  As a reminder, those minimum elements are set forth in A.R.S. § 32-1158(A).  This post will, however, address the other side of that same coin—namely, the relatively few construction contract provisions that are statutorily void and unenforceable in Arizona.

First, A.R.S. § 32-1129.05(A) provides that the following are against Arizona’s public policy and are void and unenforceable: read more

November 2016 Public Bid Awards

bid-resultsThis post is the first installment of new a monthly series highlighting notable awarded bids and contracts for Arizona public construction projects.  I know that it is helpful for my practice to keep track of new projects around the state.  So, without any further adieu, here is a list of some of the public projects awarded in or about November, 2016:

november-2016-bid-results

Hatch Development, LLC v. Sol’s Construction Co., Inc.: A Primer on Common Law Indemnification

common_law-indemnificationIndemnification provisions are mainstays of most construction contracts. As a result, all contractors should be aware that the agreements they enter likely impose certain indemnification obligations upon them.  But even the most seasoned contractors may not realize that construction contracts are not always the final word on indemnity.  Rather, certain indemnification obligations can arise purely as a matter of law, even if the parties’ contract is silent on the issue.  This is what is referred to as “common law indemnification,” and it was the subject of the Arizona Court of Appeals’ recent decision in Hatch Development, LLC, et al. v. Sol’s Construction Co., Inc., 240 Ariz. 171 (App. 2016). read more

Drone On: FAA Adopts New Regulations Governing the Use of Drones in Construction

img_0510Unmanned aircraft systems (“UAS”), which are commonly referred to as drones, are becoming increasingly less expensive and easier to operate.  As a result, these aircraft are being used more frequently for both recreational and business purposes.  The construction industry is at the forefront of commercial drone use.  In fact, just last week, Fortune published an article entitled, “The Construction Industry is in Love with Drones.”

Drones are being used by contractors for a variety of purposes, which mostly center around improving efficiency.  These uses include: (1) monitoring progress; (2) surveying sites; (3) inspecting structures; and (4) providing aerial overviews of completed projects.  The speed, frequency, and economical manner in which drones can furnish contractors with an accurate understanding of job site progress is, by itself, enough to ensure that drones are only going to become more prevalent on construction projects. read more