We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 11

Recent Indiana case addresses no-lien contract, residential mechanic’s lien, and personal liability notice statute issues

  • Barnes & Thornburg LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 18 2013

Feitler v. Springfield Enterprises, Inc., 978 N.E.2d 1160 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) addressed multiple lien-related issues arising from a residential

Indiana court holds that second-tier materialman may not invoke Personal Liability Notice Statute

  • Barnes & Thornburg LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 19 2012

Indiana Code Section 32-28-3-9, often referred to as the Personal Liability Notice (PLN) Statute, provides a means for subcontractors, equipment lessors, and laborers to assert a claim against a project owner for amounts owed for labor and material on a construction project

Non-compliance with Home Improvement Contracts Act not a defense to a meritorious claim, Indiana court holds

  • Barnes & Thornburg LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 14 2012

The Indiana Home Improvement Contracts Act, IND. CODE 24-5-11-1, et seq. (“HICA”), requires a home improvement contractor to provide a written contract to a homeowner before performing any work for an amount greater than $150.00

Seventh Circuit holds pay-if-paid provisions are not void under Indiana public policy

  • Barnes & Thornburg LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 14 2012

On May 11, 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued a decision in BMD Contractors, Inc. v. Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland (No. 11-1345), affirming a lower court summary judgment in favor of a surety on a payment bond

Indiana court holds surety liable on performance bond

  • Barnes & Thornburg LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 19 2012

In a recent Indiana case, a municipal project owner recovered under a performance bond after a sewer contractor breached a “differing subsurface conditions” provision in a construction contract

General contractor not entitled to indemnity from a subcontractor which followed the plans given to it by the general

  • Barnes & Thornburg LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 19 2010

Raytheon Engineers & Constructors, Inc. v. Sargent Elec. Co., 932 N.E. 2d 691 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) arose from the construction of a coke battery plant on property owned by Inland Steel Company

Courts rule against library in recent decisions related to expansion project

  • Barnes & Thornburg LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 19 2010

In Opinions issued on June 28 and June 29, 2010, the Court of Appeals of Indiana and Supreme Court of Indiana ruled against the Indianapolis Marion County Public Library in connection with litigation that arose from ongoing problems with the renovation and expansion of the Central Library in Indianapolis

Subcontractor bound by flow-down provision in prime contract submitted its claim too late

  • Barnes & Thornburg LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 19 2010

In Weigand Constr. Co., Inc. v. Stephens Fabrication, Inc., 929 N.E.2d 220 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010), a subcontractor bound by flow-down provisions, under which the terms of the contract between the owner and general contractor are incorporated into the subcontract, saw its claim for extra work denied because it was not submitted within the contractual deadline

Claims arising from construction of a home barred by Michigan’s six-year statute of repose

  • Barnes & Thornburg LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 19 2010

In Jetts v. Stewart Bldg. Co., et al., 2010 WL 2384931 (Mich. App. unpublished), the Court of Appeals affirmed summary disposition in favor of a general contractor because the homeowners filed suit too late

Michigan court reverses motion to dismiss in arbitration case

  • Barnes & Thornburg LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 1 2010

In Shaler Interiors v. MKK Technologies, Inc., 2010 WL 173 637, Mich. App., January 19, 2010 (unpublished), the Michigan Court of Appeals reversed a trial court’s order denying a motion for dismissal pending arbitration filed by MKK Technologies, Inc