By Brian H. Alligood November 16, 2022 Articles
North Carolina is a state that continues to recognize tort causes of action for adultery and destroying a marriage. The torts are respectively known as “criminal conversation” and “alienation of affections.” Our North Carolina office successfully defended an action that alleged both claims.
Read MoreBy Gregory R. Veal October 19, 2022 Articles
A recent decision from the Northern District of Georgia confirmed important suretyship principles in granting partial summary judgment against an obligee’s attempt to expand the performance bond scope. IHI E&C Int’l Corp. v. Robinson Mech. Contrs., Inc. and Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Md., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 180174 (Sept. 30, 2022). The court carefully examined the terms of the bond, the language of the incorporated subcontract, and the context of the parties’ dealings in ruling that the bond covered only the $24 million installation subcontract, not an additional $40 million in fabrication purchase orders by the same principal on the same project.
Read MoreBy Edward "Ward" Pankowski September 27, 2022 Articles
It’s a business’s worst nightmare: months or years into litigation over an important case, it comes out that attorneys for the other side have found and spoken with ex-employees of the business about information critical to that very case. In May of this year, the Supreme Court of Georgia laid out crucial new information for businesses and other organizations seeking to avoid that danger within the pages of Advisory Opinion No. 20-1.
Read MoreBy Gregory R. Veal August 9, 2022 Articles
The U.S. District Court in Montana recently denied Sompo’s motion to dismiss its principal’s cause of action for breach of an implied covenant of good faith in the indemnity agreement (GIA). See Bjorn Johnson Constr., LLC v. Somp Int’l Holdings, Ltd., No. 2:22-cv-19-BMM, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 131605 (D. Mont. July 22, 2022).
Read MoreBy Edward "Ward" Pankowski July 12, 2022 Articles, News/Events/Seminars
Can a person be the “victim” of a shooting when they were never shot? That was the question the Georgia Court of Appeals confronted in a major decision handed down in June of this year.