Shopping Cart (0) items Sign In

Construction Claims Monthly - Devoted exclusively to the problems of construction contracting since 1963

‹ Prev article: 

No-damage-for-delay Clause Enforced Delay-damages; Disclaimers

Wednesday, July 02, 2003 03:08 pm

No-damage-for-delay Clause Enforced Delay-damages; Disclaimers

An Ohio court has ruled that a no-damage-for-delay clause applied to a delay in issuing a notice to proceed. And the project owner could rely on a termination for convenience clause despite the failure to comply with a written notice requirement.

Mahoning County awarded a contract to Daniel E. Terreri & Sons, Inc. for renovation of a building in downtown Youngstown. The contract required completion of the work within 120 days of issuance of a notice to proceed, but there were no time limits regarding issuance of that notice.

Twenty-two days after contract award, Terreri sent the County a letter complaining [...]

› Next article: 
Sign up now for Construction Claims Monthly Online! Your own virtual help desk of must-have techniques, tutorials, and how-to articles.
Join Now Construction Claims Monthly! Close