The Associated General Contractors of America reported last week that Arizona lost 5,900 construction jobs between July 2013 and July 2014. This is surprising because, on a national level, the construction industry is growing. Thirty-nine states, including many neighboring states, added jobs over that same period. It is also surprising because Arizona suffered the second highest number of construction jobs lost. Only New Jersey, which shed 8,900 jobs, lost more.
Arizona’s losses have decreased the state’s construction employment from 123,700 to 117,800 workers , or by 4.8%. This percentage decrease is also near the worst among the states. Only New Jersey, Mississippi, and West Virginia lost greater percentages of their construction workforces in the past 12 months.
In Ramona Equipment Rental, Inc. v. Carolina Casualty Ins. Co., et al., Case No. 12-55156 (June 20, 2014), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently addressed for the first time the issue of when a 90-day Miller Act notice needs to be served for materials and/or equipment furnished on an open book account. Consistent with decisions from the First, Fourth, and Fifth Circuits, the Ninth Circuit held “that if all the goods in a series of deliveries by a supplier on an open book account are used on the same government project, the ninety-day notice is timely as to all deliveries if it is given within ninety days from the last delivery.”
Should the construction contract you are about to enter contain an indemnification provision? What about “no-damage-for-delay” or differing site condition clauses? Or how about a waiver of consequential damages? The inclusion and scope of these types of provisions (and countless others) in any particular construction contract are things you should discuss with your attorney. Whether they are necessary or should be agreed to may vary depending on the type of project and the parties involved. There are, however, certain minimum elements that must be in every Arizona construction contract.