[RPPTL-constructionlaw] Public Project Bond and SOL

Greg Elliott gelliott at elliott-berger.com
Thu Apr 19 07:21:10 PDT 2012 

public work (255.05 or 337.18 bond), or private work (713.23 or 24)?

Gregory T. Elliott
**/ELLIOTT - BERGER, P. A./**//
10225 Ulmerton Road, Suite 4A
Largo, Florida 33771
(727) 360-2600 (Phone)
(727) 360-6588 (Fax)*
Board Certified In Construction Law

*

*_NOTICE OF CONFIDENTIALITY:_***This message and its attachments are 
intended solely for the use of the addressee. In addition, this message 
and the attachments may contain information that is confidential, 
privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are 
not the intended recipient of this message, you are prohibited from 
reading, disclosing, reproducing, distributing, disseminating or 
otherwise using this transmission. Delivery of this message to any 
person other than the intended recipient is not intended to waive any 
right or privilege. If you have received this message in error, please 
promptly notify the sender by reply E-mail and immediately delete this 
message from your system.


On 4/19/2012 9:57 AM, Tracye wrote:
>
> Does anyone know of a case that would estop a surety from relying on 
> the SOL to defeat a subcontractor claim when it denied (in writing) 
> that a bond was in place during the SOL period?
>
> Logo
>
> Tracye K. Solove, Attorney at Law
>
> Certified Civil Circuit Mediator
>
> _Tracye at solovelawfirm.com_
>
> Kendallwood Office Park One
>
> 12002 Southwest 128th Court
>
> Suite 201
>
> Miami, Florida  33186
>
> Phone: (305) 612-0800
>
> Facsimile: (305) 612-0801
>
> http://www.solovelawfirm.com <http://www.solovelawfirm.com/>
>
> /Providing Statewide Legal Services in the areas of Commercial 
> Collections and Recovery, Creditors' Rights, Commercial 
> Landlord/Tenant and Real Estate Foreclosures/
>
> This transmission is intended to be delivered only to the named 
> addressee(s) and may contain information which is confidential, 
> proprietary, attorney work-product or attorney-client privileged. If 
> this notification is received by anyone other than the intended 
> recipient(s), the recipient(s) should immediately notify the 
> undersigned by E-MAIL and by telephone and obtain instructions as to 
> the disposal of the transmitted material. In no event shall this 
> material be read, used, copied, reproduced, stored or retained by 
> anyone other than the intended recipient(s) except with the express 
> written consent of the sender. Thank you.
>
> *From:*constructionlaw-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org 
> [mailto:constructionlaw-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] *On Behalf Of 
> *Bruce Partington
> *Sent:* Thursday, April 19, 2012 9:31 AM
> *To:* RPPTL constructionlaw
> *Subject:* [RPPTL-constructionlaw] FW: Bond coverage
>
> *From:*Gibbons, Michael [mailto:Michael.Gibbons at lowndes-law.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 18, 2012 6:36 PM
> *To:* Bruce Partington
> *Subject:* Bond coverage
>
>   Good question Bruce.  My thoughts:
>
>     1.  Take a look at Phoenix Indemnity v. Board of Public 
> Instruction of Alachua County, 114 So. 2d 478 (Fla. 1st DCA 1959).  
> The Phoenix Indemnity court held that the contractor's surety bond was 
> liable for payment of insurance premiums not paid by contractor 
> despite contractor having an express contractual obligation to make 
> the premium payments.  Not exactly your claim but close and certainly 
> gets at the obvious issue that your claim is not for completion of the 
> bricks and mortar (which every surety lawyer wants to limit the surety 
> bond coverage to).
>
>     2.  Is there an issue of who suffered the damage and the operation 
> of the mutual waiver of subrogation clauses doubtlessly present in the 
> contracts at issue?  Could not tell in your summary but I believe this 
> may be an issue.  If the GC had insurance coverage for the claim 
> (which it sounds like) and would simply like to have the sub's policy 
> be primary on the loss, then there may be an issue with actual damages 
> suffered by GC (given the presence of insurance).  Also, if the loss 
> falls on the carrier, depending on the operation and breadth of the 
> mutual waiver of subro language, there may not be any subrogation 
> rights arising out of the loss (especially a property loss).
>
>    3.  Is there an issue re operation of a mutual waiver of 
> consequential damages provision in the incorporated subcontract 
> (either directly or by reference or incorporation of the prime 
> contract documents)?  Not clear whether the category of damages being 
> claimed would fall into the "consequential damages" bucket but it 
> sounds like that might be the case.
>
>    4.  The AIA A 312 bond form is broad in scope and contains some 
> favorable language for the obligee.  Without knowing all the facts, it 
> sounds like there may be a colorable claim if some of the above raised 
> concerns are addressed (as well as others which I have failed to 
> identify).
>
>   Good luck.
>
> *Michael R. Gibbons  (**Bio* 
> <http://lowndes-law.com/our-people/michael-r-gibbons>*)*
>
> *Shareholder*
>
> Lowndes, Drosdick, Doster, Kantor & Reed, P.A.
>
> 450 South Orange Avenue, 8th Floor
>
> Orlando, FL 32801
>
> Phone: 407-418-6378
>
> Fax: 407-843-4444
>
> email: michael.gibbons at lowndes-law.com 
> <mailto:michael.gibbons at lowndes-law.com>
>
> website: http://www.lowndes-law.com
>
> *Notice of Confidentiality:*This e-mail communication and the 
> attachment(s) hereto, if any, are intended solely for the information 
> and use of the addressee(s) identified above and may contain 
> information which is legally privileged from disclosure and/or 
> otherwise confidential. If a recipient of this e-mail communication is 
> not an addressee (or an authorized representative of an addressee), 
> such recipient is hereby advised that any review, disclosure, 
> reproduction, re-transmission or other dissemination or use of this 
> e-mail communication (or any information contained herein) is strictly 
> prohibited. If you are not an addressee and have received this e-mail 
> communication in error, please advise the sender of that circumstance 
> either by reply e-mail or by telephone at (800) 356-6818, immediately 
> delete this e-mail communication from any computer and destroy all 
> physical copies of same.
>
> *Replies Filtered:* Any incoming reply to this e-mail communication or 
> other e-mail communication to us will be electronically filtered for 
> "spam" and/or "viruses." That filtering process may result in such 
> reply or other e-mail communications to us being quarantined (i.e., 
> potentially not received at our site at all) and/or delayed in 
> reaching us. For that reason, we cannot guarantee that we will receive 
> your reply or other e-mail communications to us and/or that we will 
> receive the same in a timely manner. Accordingly, you should consider 
> sending communications to us which are particularly important or 
> time-sensitive by means other than e-mail.
>
> *Notice Under U.S. Treasury Department Circular 230:* To the extent 
> that this e-mail communication and the attachment(s) hereto, if any, 
> may contain written advice concerning or relating to a Federal (U.S.) 
> tax issue, United States Treasury Department Regulations (Circular 
> 230) require that we (and we do hereby) advise and disclose to you 
> that, unless we expressly state otherwise in writing, such tax advice 
> is not written or intended to be used, and cannot be used by you (the 
> addressee), or other person(s), for purposes of (1) avoiding penalties 
> imposed under the United States Internal Revenue Code or (2) 
> promoting, marketing or recommending to any other person(s) the (or 
> any of the) transaction(s) or matter(s) addressed, discussed or 
> referenced herein. Each taxpayer should seek advice from an 
> independent tax advisor with respect to any Federal tax issue(s), 
> transaction(s) or matter(s) addressed, discussed or referenced herein 
> based upon his, her or its particular circumstances. [v4.30]
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> constructionlaw mailing list
> constructionlaw at lists.flabarrpptl.org
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/constructionlaw
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/constructionlaw/attachments/20120419/bdf77b9e/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ConstructionLaw 8%.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 49086 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/constructionlaw/attachments/20120419/bdf77b9e/ConstructionLaw8.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 7190 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/constructionlaw/attachments/20120419/bdf77b9e/attachment.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3183 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/constructionlaw/attachments/20120419/bdf77b9e/attachment.jpe>

More information about the constructionlaw mailing list