Ty Laurie has mediated numerous construction disputes to successful conclusions throughout his 20 years of experience as a certified mediator. His success rate is well over 95 percent and even the cases he has not settled as a mediator have ultimately resulted in settlements due to the significant progress made during the mediations he conducted. Several attorneys, contractors, owners, design professionals, insurers and sureties can attest to Mr. Laurie’s effectiveness, fairness and persuasiveness as a mediator. He is listed as a leading lawyer in construction law and alternative dispute resolution law by the Leading Lawyers Network.
Mr. Laurie’s successful mediations include:
- $55 million dispute involving the construction of a cavern storage facility for certain flammable gas products. The contractor claimed more than $15 million in work performed, and the owner claimed more than $40 million in various types of damages. The case arose out of a default termination by the owner that the contractor disputed. The dispute focused on numerous technical issues involving the work and damage to the cavern. Each side had four experts with expertise in various different disciplines.
- $28 million dispute between a municipality, project engineer, and contractor for the construction of a highway. The dispute centered around delays that caused failure to meet the completion date. In addition the parties disagreed regarding the total “total cost” method of proving related damages. Contractor sought damages from city and engineer for fraud, breach of contract, negligence and unjust enrichment arising out of changes in means and methods, delay, interference, lack of access and wrongful withholding of liquidated damages. The city claimed that contractor’s damages were self-inflicted and that using the total cost method of proving delay damages was unacceptable.
- $22.5 million dispute between an architect and a county board of commissioners for construction of a ballpark facility. The architect sought unpaid additional service requests and unpaid retainage fees. The county claimed that architect's design errors or omissions caused the county to incur additional project costs and delays, resulting in various overruns. The county also claimed repair costs for various design defects. The mediation also settled a related action between contractor and county for unpaid work related in part to the claimed design errors.
- $19 million dispute between a municipality, engineering firm, and contractor for removal and replacement of a bridge in a metropolitan area. The city and steel contractor claimed that errors, omissions, and flawed designs provided by the engineering firm resulted in long delays in beginning the bridgework and concrete removal due to constant modifications of the designs and failure of engineering firm to adequately estimate the timeframe of the bridge outage.
- $18 million dispute between a general contractor and a subcontractor involving construction of a hospital. The subcontractor supplied lime kiln dust and equipment for soil stabilization. The contractor claimed the subcontractor supplied defective lime kiln dust, was negligent in not properly spreading the lime kiln dust; and failed to properly advise the contractor on the proper use of the lime kiln dust. The contractor sought damages it incurred conducting repairs and settling with the hospital. The subcontractor claimed it merely supplied the lime kiln dust and equipment and that the contractor was negligent in improperly spreading the lime kiln dust, causing the foundation and flooring to heave. The subcontractor sought rescission or reformation of the contract because the subcontract was based upon mutual or unilateral mistake
- $10 million dispute between developer and construction manager involving construction of a senior living facility. The developer claimed construction manager failed to complete the project on time and sought damages. The construction manager claimed delay was caused by architect’s inadequate plans, specifications, and design flaws and sought payment for balance of contract.
- $9 million dispute between a governmental regulatory agency and a contractor involving the design, site development, and construction of a training facility. The dispute centered on an outdoor firing range that was designed but never built because of disagreements on the interpretation of contract requirements for sound baffling and a roof. The contractor sought damages it claimed were caused by government agency misadministration, design demands, and acts and omissions. The government claimed the contractor was solely responsible for failing to build the firing range and seeks credit for work deleted from the contract.
- $7.6 million dispute between a developer and university involving construction of dormitories. The developer claimed university failed to recognize valid change orders for costs incurred due to delays, unsuitable soils, unforeseen site conditions, and changes in scope. The developer sought the unpaid contract balance. The university claimed the developer deviated from owner-approved design and never submitted any change order requests during construction. The university sought reimbursement for expenses incurred in finding alternate housing for students
.
- $7.5 dispute between owner, developer/contractor, tenant, and subcontractors for construction of a warehouse/distribution center. The dispute centered around pavement and slope failures on the site. The owner sought damages from the developer and contractor pursuant to an indemnity agreement for repair/remediation work. The developer/contractor countersued, claiming the owner purchased building “as is;” countersued subcontractors pursuant to an indemnity agreement; and countersued the tenant for unjust enrichment. The subcontractors countersued the contractor claiming they are owned money for extra work on the project.
- $5.3 million dispute between contractor and municipality for construction of a wastewater equalization basin. The contractor claimed extra work, design revisions, and unreasonable delays caused by the municipality and its designer prevented early completion of the project and sought payment for contract balance and loss of early completion bonus it would have earned. The municipality claimed contractor failed to use continuous rebar in concrete slabs, the repair and remediation of which caused the delayed completion. The municipality sought damages for contractor’s failure to complete the work in a timely manner.
- $4 million dispute between a general contractor, mechanical subcontractor and developer of mixed use retail/residential condominium development. The developer claimed delays due to change orders, inadequacy of as-built drawings, lack of approval on design-build drawings contributed to the late completion of condominium units in a deteriorating real estate market. The contractor claimed indecision by the developer caused delays in approvals for drawings and progress on work to be done by contractor and subcontractor.
- $4 million dispute between a hospital and terminated developer over fees and costs that the developer owed the hospital for a planned medical office building that was ultimately never built. The parties raised several contractual interpretation and damage calculation issues that impeded settlement prior to mediation.
- $2.8 million dispute between a contractor and steel suppliers for construction of a sports arena. The suppliers sought payment for costs incurred by contractor’s change orders, overtime incurred because of delayed delivery of precast, equitable adjustment and construction acceleration costs. The contractor claimed the suppliers inaccurately estimated their labors costs, labor was inefficient, and failed to perform the work properly, thereby necessitating substantial amounts of rework.
- $2.2 million dispute between a municipality and contractors for construction of a water treatment plant. The municipality claimed contractors failed to complete project according to revised completion dates and sued for breach of contract and negligence. The contractors claimed that municipality waived liquidated damages during the project and sought payment for unpaid contract balances.
- $1.7 million dispute between a contractor and subcontractor for new construction and renovation of a food processing facility. The contractor claimed the subcontractor performed defective workmanship and sought reimbursement for expense incurred to complete punchlist items and for corrective work. The subcontractor claimed contractor provided inaccurate and incomplete drawings, untimely drawings, revisions, and scope changes and sought payment for unpaid contract balance.
- $500,000 dispute between a contractor, precast subcontractor, and municipality for construction of a green-designed public works facility. The dispute involved repair and replacement of failing cast-in-place pilaster and wall systems that failed under dead load and minimal live load. The contractor sought reimbursement for replacement and repair costs. The municipality claimed that damage was the result of supplier’s design and work related to the precast. Supplier denied its precast design and work was faulty and seeks payment for subcontract balance.
|
