| |
Below
you will find a synopsis of some of the cases handled
by our firm.
You may click on the citation of a particular case
for a link to the full text of the Court's opinion.
Breach of Contract
C. Max, Inc. v. Cresta
Construction et. al., 72
Mass.App.Ct. 1112, 891 N.E.2d 718 (Table), 2008 WL
3286507 (Mass.App.Ct.) (Unpublished Decision).
Prosecuted claims on behalf of a subcontractor per
M.G.L. c. 149, §29 to Judgment and a full recovery
of the subcontractor's contract balance as well as
an award for legal fees. Successfully defended delay
claims brought by the general contractor. Matter was
fully affirmed on appeal.
See Decision
J.K. Glass, Inc. v. Jan Five Corp. d/b/a
Alexandra Construction et al., Suffolk Superior,
C.A. No. 01-0850-BLS (Business Litigation Session)
Prosecuted breach of contract, bond and mechanic's
lien claims on behalf of a subcontractor on a private
project to Judgment obtaining recovery of substantially
all of the subcontractor's contract balance. Successfully
defended alleged delay, extra work and incomplete
work back-charges valued in excess of $1 Million brought
by the general contractor.
See
Decision/Aug 7th
See
Decision/Oct 23d
Bad Faith of the Commonwealth
TLT Construction Corp.
v. Commonwealth (D.C.P.O.), Suffolk
Superior, C.A. No. 92-6572F
Judgment obtained against the Commonwealth for general
contractor in the amount of $2,018,621, plus interest
of approximately $800,000.
Additionally,
a finding entered against the Commonwealth for sanctions
per M.G.L. c. 231, §6F for insubstantial, frivolous
and bad faith defenses, awarding 150% interest, legal
fees and costs, totaling approximately $1 Million.
See
Decision
Chapter 149, §29
Bastianelli v. National
Union Fire Ins. Co., 36 Mass.App.Ct. 367 (1994).
Interpretation
of Public Construction bond statute finding that actual
notice is sufficient to meet the statutory requirement
for "written" notice under M.G.L. c. 149,
§29.
See Decision
Chapter 30, §39F
Manuel F. Spencer &
Sons, Inc. v. Commonwealth, 16
Mass.App.Ct 290 (1983).
First
case in Massachusetts interpreting "extra work,"
as used in M.G.L. c. 30, §39F, the public works'
subcontractor direct payment statute.
Also
cited for interpretation of "business records
exception" to hearsay (M.G.L. c. 233, §78).
See
Decision
Chapter 30, §39N
Sutton v. MDC, 423 Mass. 200 (1996).
S.J.C. decision reversing Appeals Court decision (38
Mass.App.Ct. 764 (1985)).
First
case in Massachusetts recognizing the federal concept
of a so-called "Type II" changed condition
in the work under M.G.L. c. 30, §39N.
Also cited for interpretation of the constitutional
provision for the effective date of a new statute,
c. 231, §6C and §6I, concerning interest
on judgments against the Commonwealth.
See
Decision
Chapter 93A, §11
TLT Construction
Corp. vs. Tappe, 48 Mass.App.Ct 1 (1999).
Decision
sustaining a general contractor's right to proceed
under c. 93A against a public construction project
architect for bad faith conduct, subsequent to recovering
damages from a municipality, as determined by arbitration
proceedings. See Decision
R.W. Granger & Sons,
Inc. v. J&S Insulation,
Worcester Superior
Court, C.A. No. 92-1388 (affr'd 435 Mass. 66 (2001)).
After
recovery on behalf of the subcontractor of some $410,245.83
in funds due on a public construction project (including
interest and attorney's fees per M.G.L. c. 149, §29
and defeat of $500,000.00 in backcharges), a finding
was entered for the subcontractor against the general
contractor's surety for double damages and attorney's
fees pursuant to M.G.L. c. 93A, §11 in the sum
of $966,284.94, based on unfair and deceptive claim
settlement practices.
Supreme
Judicial Court of Massachusetts affirmed the decision
of the Worcester Superior Court in 2001, allowing
the subcontractor's recovery, including multiple damages
and legal fees, against the general contractor's surety
for the C. 93A violations.
See
Decision
back to top
|
