Case 1: “Southern Builders Inc. vs. Shaw Development LLC, Case No. 19-C-07-011405 (Md. Cir. Ct. 2007)”. Specifically determining roles and duties for each project team member in the project contracts is extremely necessary to successful green-building-project delivery. If there are ambiguities as for varied services or work, problems will instantaneously occur. Facts and Issues. This is one of the first lawsuits related to green construction in the United States. In this case, Shaw Development as the owner, appointed Southern Builders Inc. as the contractor, to construct a $7.5 million, 23-unit condominium and restaurant project, known as Captain’s Galley, in Somerset County, Maryland along with obtaining the LEED-Silver certification. The
…show more content…
Basically, the rule regarding this case is to obviously clarify the green building expectations and contractual requirements for contractor in the contract in order to avoid the filing mechanic’s lien leading to reach the courts. In fact, this litigation was resolved out of court; nonetheless, there are two particularly important points arisen from this case. The first one is that all parties in green construction’s contract need to perceive the existing rules applied to green project. Secondly, contractual provisions and documents have to be ensured to account for any consequences related to green-building work. Eventually, before signing a green-feature contract, the contractor, architects, and developers should carefully define its …show more content…
Currently the trend towards mandatory green building regulation has been at the municipal level and was at least partly motivated by federal inaction in this area. If the U.S. Congress did pass green building legislation that was signed into law by the president, there could be a spate of federal preemption challenges where plaintiffs would most likely challenge a more stringent state or local regulation that is a greater burden than any national standard. There have already been some lawsuits based on this theory.
Case 3: “Henry Gifford, et al. v. U.S. Green Building Council, et al., U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, 10‐7747 (filed October 8, 2010)”. Facts and Issues. Rules, Applications, and Conclusion.
Case 4: “Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Inc., et al. v. Weyerhaeuser Co., No. 8:2011cv0047 (Md. Dist. Ct.Jan. 6, 2011)”. Facts and Issues.
Rules, Applications, and Conclusion.
Case 5: “Steven Gidumal, et al. v. Site 16/17 Development LLC, et al., No. 105958/10 (N.Y. City. Sup. Ct. 2010)” Facts and Issues.
Rules, Applications, and Conclusion.
Case 6: “Metcalf Construction Co. v. United States, Case No. 20135041 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 11, 2014)”. Facts and Issues.
Rules, Applications, and Conclusion.
Other cases: “City of Palo Alto vs. Flintco Pacific, Inc.” and “Pennsylvania Department of General Services vs. Hampton Technologies,
Basically, the rule regarding this case is to obviously clarify the green building expectations and contractual requirements for contractor in the contract in order to avoid the filing mechanic’s lien leading to reach the courts. In fact, this litigation was resolved out of court; nonetheless, there are two particularly important points arisen from this case. The first one is that all parties in green construction’s contract need to perceive the existing rules applied to green project. Secondly, contractual provisions and documents have to be ensured to account for any consequences related to green-building work. Eventually, before signing a green-feature contract, the contractor, architects, and developers should carefully define its …show more content…
Currently the trend towards mandatory green building regulation has been at the municipal level and was at least partly motivated by federal inaction in this area. If the U.S. Congress did pass green building legislation that was signed into law by the president, there could be a spate of federal preemption challenges where plaintiffs would most likely challenge a more stringent state or local regulation that is a greater burden than any national standard. There have already been some lawsuits based on this theory.
Case 3: “Henry Gifford, et al. v. U.S. Green Building Council, et al., U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, 10‐7747 (filed October 8, 2010)”. Facts and Issues. Rules, Applications, and Conclusion.
Case 4: “Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Inc., et al. v. Weyerhaeuser Co., No. 8:2011cv0047 (Md. Dist. Ct.Jan. 6, 2011)”. Facts and Issues.
Rules, Applications, and Conclusion.
Case 5: “Steven Gidumal, et al. v. Site 16/17 Development LLC, et al., No. 105958/10 (N.Y. City. Sup. Ct. 2010)” Facts and Issues.
Rules, Applications, and Conclusion.
Case 6: “Metcalf Construction Co. v. United States, Case No. 20135041 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 11, 2014)”. Facts and Issues.
Rules, Applications, and Conclusion.
Other cases: “City of Palo Alto vs. Flintco Pacific, Inc.” and “Pennsylvania Department of General Services vs. Hampton Technologies,