Dallas Austin

Recently, the Virginia governor signed into law “SB550,” which explicitly makes “pay-if-paid” clauses unenforceable by statute, joining six other states with similar laws. Texas also has a statute governing pay-if-paid or contingent payment clauses, though does not outrightly void them.  What are contingent payment clauses and what are the statutory restrictions in Texas on their enforceability?  This article provides a primer. What are contingent payment clauses? Contingent payment clauses are just that, clauses that provide that when X happens, Y occurs (i.e., X is a condition prec

On par with rarity of the collapse of a high-rise building in the US, an unprecedented $1 billion settlement agreement was recently presented to the court presiding over the property, personal injury and wrongful death claims relating to the Champlain Tower South collapse.  Who contributed and the amounts they agreed to pay may surprise you.  A.   The Settling Parties The biggest contributors towards settlement are not who you might think they are or should be. As a 40+ year old building, the statute of repose had long ago cut off liability for the contractors and design professionals invo

Earlier this year, the Dallas Court Appeals enforced a waiver of subrogation clause in a construction contract relating to the Winspear Opera House, holding that a commercial general liability (CGL) insurance policy was “property insurance” contemplated by the contract.  On behalf of our firm, I argued successfully that the waiver of subrogation barred the insurer’s claim. In Arch Ins. Co. v. Suprema, Inc., the roofing subcontractor, Anchor Roofing Systems (Anchor), and the supplier of roofing membrane, Soprema, argued that the Arch insurance Company’s (Arch) lawsuit to recover $1.6 m

On May 20, 2022, the Texas Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in James Construction Group, LLC. v. Westlake Chemical Corp., holding that substantial compliance with notice provisions in construction contracts is acceptable, except in one instance. If the contract requires that notice be in writing, the notice must be in writing. While the James Construction opinion has other important holdings, in this article we will focus exclusively on the Court’s application of the doctrine of substantial compliance with contractual notice requirements. The factual history of the dispute is l

The Miller Act, 40 U.S.C. §§ 3131-3134, governs performance and payment bond acquisition and claims on federal projects (that is, projects being constructed on US Government property, or for the US Government or any agency of the US Government). Unlike the many tricky provisions hidden in the Texas Mechanics’ Lien statute, the Miller Act is relatively simple to maneuver, but not without pitfalls for the unwary.  Under the Miller Act, contractors on federal projects must post two bonds: A performance bond and a labor and material payment bond. A corporate surety company issuing these bonds