CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. 477 F.Supp. 897
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 10, 1979

Rheuark v. Shaw

This federal civil rights case addresses constitutional violations stemming from extensive delays in preparing trial transcripts for indigent criminal appellants in Dallas County, Texas. Plaintiffs John Doescher, Robert Allen Jordan, and Jack Rheuark alleged that delays of nine to twenty-three months violated their due process rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court found these delays unconstitutional, awarding nominal damages to Doescher and Rheuark, and $3,000 in actual damages to Jordan. While denying injunctive relief and punitive damages, the court determined that individual defendants—Judge Metcalf, Dallas County Commissioners, and court reporter Paul Bastas—were immune from personal damage liability due to judicial, legislative, and qualified immunities, respectively. However, Dallas County was held liable for damages and attorneys' fees due to an official policy and custom of inadequately funding court reporters that directly caused the unconstitutional delays, and attorneys' fees were awarded to the plaintiffs against the individual defendants in their official capacities and Dallas County.

Due Process ViolationSpeedy AppealCivil RightsIndigent DefendantsTrial TranscriptsCourt DelaysJudicial ImmunityLegislative ImmunityQualified ImmunityMunicipal Liability
References
99
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Blau Mechanical Corp. v. City of New York

This appeal addresses whether contractual delays, for which the plaintiff-respondent sought monetary damages for plumbing work at the New York Zoological Park, were contemplated by the parties' agreement. The court concluded that these delays were indeed contemplated, reversing a prior Supreme Court finding. The contract included a clause barring damages for delay unless caused by intentional wrongdoing, gross negligence, or willful misconduct. The plaintiff alleged delays due to structural changes, unexpected subsurface conditions, and interference from a local community group. However, the court found that the contract explicitly anticipated changes and differing subsurface conditions. Additionally, delays from community group intrusion were not attributable to the City as grossly negligent or intentional, thereby precluding recovery for damages.

Contractual DelaysDamages for DelayContemplated DelaysConstruction ContractPlumbing WorkNew York CityAppellate ReviewSubsurface ConditionsChange OrdersCommunity Interference
References
4
Case No. 02A01-9803-CH-00064
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 11, 1999

White's Electric v. Lewis Constr.

This case involves a dispute between White's Electric, Heating, Air and Plumbing (subcontractor) and Lewis Construction Company (general contractor) and Frontier Insurance Company (surety) regarding a public housing renovation project. White's Plumbing sued for unpaid contract payments and damages for delays. The trial court initially awarded White's Plumbing damages for breach of contract and for disruption and delay. On appeal, the Court of Appeals of Tennessee affirmed the breach of contract damages, finding that Lewis Construction breached the contract first. However, the court reversed the award for delay damages, determining that White's Plumbing failed to comply with the notice requirements for such claims outlined in the project manual, which was incorporated by reference into the subcontract. The case was also remanded to clarify the authenticity of the contractor's bond.

Construction LawSubcontractor DisputeGeneral Contractor LiabilitySurety BondBreach of ContractDelay DamagesContractual NoticeIncorporation by ReferencePublic Works ProjectAppellate Review
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 09, 1984

Moore Construction Co. v. Clarksville Department of Electricity

This case concerns a contractor's claim for delay damages arising from the construction of an office building and warehouse for the Clarksville Department of Electricity. Moore Construction Company sued the Department, Kennon Construction Company (a co-prime contractor), and Cincinnati Insurance Company (Kennon's bonding company), alleging breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and third-party beneficiary claims. The trial court awarded Moore Construction Company $2,719.75 for extra work but denied delay damages, citing a lack of a written change order. On appeal, the court affirmed the award for extra work and modified the judgment to include an additional $8,986.08 in delay damages. The appellate court ruled that the Department's conduct waived the written change order requirement, and that Moore was an intended third-party beneficiary of the contract between Kennon and the Department, allowing recovery for certain increased supervisory, overhead, and equipment-related costs resulting from the delay.

Construction LawContract BreachDelay DamagesThird-Party BeneficiaryWaiver of Contract TermsConstruction ProjectPrime ContractorsSurety BondsOverhead CostsLabor Costs
References
40
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Bovis Lend Lease (LMB), Inc. v. Lower Manhattan Development Corp.

This case involves a contractual dispute between Bovis Lend Lease (LMB), Inc. (Plaintiff), a deconstruction contractor, and Lower Manhattan Development Corp. (LMDC) (Defendant), responsible for redeveloping lower Manhattan after 9/11. Bovis was contracted to deconstruct the Deutsche Bank Building but encountered unforeseen regulatory interference and delays, leading to significant cost overruns. Bovis's amended complaint sought damages for extra work, general conditions, profit, insurance costs, and constructive acceleration. The court ruled that Bovis's claims for extra work due to regulatory interference and damages for delay were barred by the contract's 'no damages for delay' clause and the explicit assumption of regulatory delay risks by Bovis. While some claims were dismissed, others related to amounts due under the original lump sum contract, including overhead, profit, and insurance (excluding fire-related incremental costs), were reinstated after reargument. Ultimately, the court emphasized upholding the clear terms of the contract between sophisticated business entities.

Contractual disputeDeconstruction projectRegulatory interferenceDelay damagesNo damages for delay clauseExtra workConstruction lawAppellate reviewContract interpretationRisk allocation
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Co. v. McDonough

This case involves Roland McDonough, a claimant who settled a workers' compensation claim with Liberty Mutual Insurance Company in March 1983, where Liberty Mutual agreed to cover future medical expenses for five years. Following subsequent back operations, Liberty Mutual delayed payment for a fifth surgery in October 1984, leading McDonough to sue for damages due to unreasonable delay and unfair practices. The jury found Liberty Mutual liable for failing to provide promised medical benefits and engaging in unreasonable delay, awarding McDonough damages for mental anguish and additional damages. The appeals court reformed the judgment by deleting a $2,000.00 award and affirmed the remaining $45,000.00, along with interest and costs.

Medical ExpensesCompromise Settlement AgreementUnreasonable DelayBad FaithDeceptive Trade Practices ActMental Anguish DamagesTreble DamagesAttorney's FeesAppellate JurisdictionInsurance Carrier Liability
References
11
Case No. M2008-02844-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 28, 2010

Lee Masonry, Inc. v. City of Franklin, Tennessee Stansell Electric Company, Inc. v. City of Franklin, Tennessee

Two trade contractors, Lee Masonry, Inc. and Stansell Electric Company, Inc., sued the City of Franklin for breach of contract, alleging the City failed to prevent delays caused by other contractors and withheld retainages. The City defended by citing a 'no damages for delays' clause, untimely notice of claims, and the contractors' acceptance of time extensions without reserving rights to increased compensation. The trial court found all the City's defenses invalid and awarded damages to the contractors. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, concluding the delays were within the City's control, notice requirements were met or waived, and the executed change orders did not waive the contractors' right to additional compensation. The court upheld the damages awarded for loss of productivity, extended field overhead, and professional fees.

Contract LawConstruction ContractsBreach of ContractDelay DamagesNo Damages for Delay ClauseContractual Notice RequirementsWaiver of Contract TermsChange OrdersAccord and SatisfactionLoss of Productivity Damages
References
30
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United States Ex Rel. E & R Construction Co. v. Guy H. James Construction Co.

E & R Construction Co., Inc. sued Guy H. James Construction Company and Federal Insurance Company under the Miller Act for breach of a subcontract related to the Cordell Hull Lock and Dam project. E & R presented twelve claims alleging material interference and breaches of contract by James, leading to increased costs and damages. The court found that James materially breached the contract through various actions, including wrongfully depositing shot rock, requiring extra work, and causing delays, entitling E & R to recover damages on several claims under a *quantum meruit* theory. However, the court denied claims regarding arbitrary dredge limits and dredge delay. The court also clarified that the surety, Federal Insurance Company, was not liable for certain delay and property damage claims.

Construction LawMiller ActSubcontractBreach of ContractQuantum MeruitDelay DamagesConstruction DisputesFederal CourtContract InterferenceSite Conditions
References
51
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 03, 1995

Merritt Meridian Construction Corp. v. Old Country Iron Works, Inc.

Plaintiff, a general contractor, sued defendant, a subcontractor, for breach of contract on a construction project at West Point. Plaintiff alleged wrongful detention of materials, unfinished work costs, delay damages, and Davis-Bacon Act violations. Defendant counterclaimed for the unpaid balance of $24,700, arguing substantial performance. The Supreme Court found for the defendant, ruling delay damages were covered by stipulation, plaintiff's completion costs lacked evidence, and plaintiff had no standing for Davis-Bacon Act claims, awarding defendant the full counterclaim. On appeal, the higher court affirmed the finding of substantial performance but modified the judgment, reducing defendant's award by $4,200 for two uncompleted staircases. The appellate court upheld the lower court's findings regarding delay damages and plaintiff's lack of standing for Davis-Bacon Act violations.

Breach of ContractConstruction LawSubcontractor DisputeSubstantial PerformanceDelay DamagesDavis-Bacon ActStipulationAppellate ReviewDamage CalculationJudgment Modification
References
8
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 04227 [231 AD3d 223]
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 15, 2024

JDS Dev. LLC v. Parkside Constr. Bldrs. Corp.

This appeal concerns a dispute over a performance bond in a construction project, the Steinway Tower, between JDS Development LLC (beneficiary) and Allied World Insurance Company (surety) regarding delays by Parkside Construction Builders Corp. (principal). JDS sought to recover delay damages from Allied under an A312 performance bond. The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed the lower court's decision, ruling that JDS failed to satisfy the mandatory conditions precedent outlined in paragraph 3 of the A312 bond, which require notice of potential default and termination of the principal while the bonded work is still in progress. JDS issued these notices only after the work covered by the bond was completed and the principal had abandoned the larger project. The court reiterated that strict compliance with these conditions is necessary to trigger the surety's obligations, including for delay damages.

performance bondsurety liabilityAIA Document A312conditions precedentconstruction delayscontract defaultterminationsummary judgmentAppellate Divisioncontract law
References
11
Showing 1-10 of 5,624 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational