Pre-lien Notice for Labor Unambiguously Not Required.  In January 2024, almost a year after Division 2 of the Washington Court of Appeals decided Velazquez Framing, LLC v. Cascadia Homes, Inc.,1 the Washington Supreme Court, sitting en banc, reversed and remanded the matter for further proceedings.2  The relevant background facts are that Cascadia Homes, Inc. (“Cascadia”), was a general contractor and also owned the property that was the subject matter of the underlying dispute.  Cascadia wished to construct a new home on the property.  Cascadia hired High End Construction ..read more

The University of Washington (UW), a public university, aimed to secure a real estate developer for a new building on its campus. The proposal involved an 80-year ground lease (the “Lease”), and developers submitted bids. The selected developer would demolish an existing building, construct a new one, own it during the Lease at its own cost, and UW would lease back a portion, with ownership reverting to UW at the Lease’s end. Alexandria Real Equities, Inc. (ARE) was a finalist but ultimately was not selected, and the Lease was awarded to Wexford Science and Technology, LLC (Wexford). As a resu ..read more

It has long been the law in Washington that contracting parties are free to draft contractual indemnity agreements to allocate risk arising from performance of the work, and Courts will generally enforce those agreements as written. This well-settled principle was recently reaffirmed in King County v. CPM Development Corp., dba ICON Materials[1] a decision from Division I of the Washington Court of Appeals, wherein one party to an indemnity agreement attempted to evade its contractual obligations by arguing that certain common law indemnity principles supersede the written terms. This appeal f ..read more

The recent unpublished case, Cascade Civil Construction, LLC v. Jackson Dean Construction, Inc., et al.,[1] provides a legal justification for contractors to require a directive or change order in advance of performing changed work—thereby preventing the party who requested the changed work from later arguing that notice provisions were not complied with. In the case, Jackson Dean, the prime contractor, hired Cascade to perform excavation work on a project to build a new Costco Corporate headquarters. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic and other issues, Jackson Dean directed resequencing, which requ ..read more

            In July 2023, the Washington legislature passed Senate Bill 5186, which mandates inclusion of select antidiscrimination clauses in every state contract and subcontract for public works, goods, or services executed after January 1, 2024.[i]  RCW 49.60.530(3) codifies the now-required antidiscrimination clauses, which prohibit four categories of discrimination against any person because of age, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, race, creed, color, national origin, citizenship or immigration status, ho ..read more

On May 30, 2023, the Washington Court of Appeals, Division I, issued a decision that appears to expand a contractor’s obligation with respect to WSDOT notice and claim procedures. In Graham Contracting, Ltd. v. City of Federal Way, No. 83494-1-I, 2023 WL 3721171 (Wash. Ct. App. May 30, 2023) (Unpublished), the Court held that under the 2016 WSDOT Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction (“Standard Specifications”), a Contractor must protest the actions of not only the “Engineer” but also the actions of any person or organization acting on behalf of the Owner. This c ..read more

By Joshua Lane Raymond Budd developed mesothelioma after working with a drywall product called “joint compound” from 1962 to 1972.  He sued Kaiser Gypsum Company, Inc. and others for damages, contending that the company’s joint compound caused his illness. A jury returned a verdict in Budd’s favor and awarded him nearly $13.5 million. Kaiser appealed, claiming (1) insufficient randomness in the jury-selection process, (2) erroneous transcription of expert testimony, (3) lack of proximate causation, (4) lack of medical causation ..read more

Chapter 14.34 of the Seattle Municipal Code is a relatively new ordinance that can affect the parties to a construction contract for work performed within the City of Seattle’s city limits. The Independent Contractor Protection Ordinance (“ICPO”) was enacted to provide self-employed persons, or entities composed of not more than one person, regardless of corporate form, recourse for timely payment for work performed.  The ICPO applies to contracts of $600[i] or more between an independent contractor and a hiring entity where the work, in whole or in part, is known to be performed within t ..read more

by Mason D. Fletcher The Seminar Group, Inc. is hosting the 30th Annual Construction Law Seminar in Seattle on October 5 and 6, 2023. This seminar will address recent developments in Washington and Federal case law, statues, and regulations. The seminar is available via Live Webcast or in person at the Courtyard Marriott Seattle Downtown/Pioneer Square. Ahlers, Cressman, & Sleight PLLC is excited to have several of its attorneys presenting at the Seminar: • Paul R. Cressman, a Program Co-Chair, will introduce the Seminar both days. • On October 5, John P. Ahlers and Lindsay T. Watkins wil ..read more

Global Tel*Link Corp. v. Washington State Department of Corrections, et al., 24 Wn. App. 2d 852, 521 P.3d 250 (Div. II, December 6, 2022).  An unsuccessful public contract bidder’s claim is moot once the contract is executed. The Court of Appeals recently confirmed, in Global Tel*Link Corp. v. Washington State Department of Corrections, et al.,[1] that an unsuccessful public contract bidder’s claim is moot once the contract is executed. Since 2006, Global Tel*Link Corporation (“GTL”) has provided telephone, internet, and related services to incarcerated individuals in Washington ..read more