Privity Defense and Economic Loss Rule By Paul Potts Interpretation in law identifies the meaning of words or actions, construction their legal effect. Until its decline over the last half-century the doctrine of privity, a common law principle inherited from British law, was impenetrable defense for architects and engineers against claims brought by third parties (those not signatory to the contract) even if personal injury or ancillary property damage was involved.  Justice Benjamin Cordozo, sitting on the New York Court of Appeals in 1932, and later a Supreme Court justice, described the law this way: “The Law of Privity provides
Read More

Errors and Omissions Negotiations By Paul Potts Inexperience accounts for the conviction there shouldn’t be any mistakes in the architect’s plans and specifications. It is more logical there will be mistakes. The only pertinent questions are how many mistakes, how much will they cost in aggregate and who pays for them. Discussing the costs of errors and omissions during contract negotiations is the best way to keep this issue from corrupting the architect’s relationship with the owner. The Initial Decision Maker The architect’s construction administrator (CCA) will be negotiating on different fronts when errors and omissions are discovered: with the
Read More

A 50-Year Driveway By Paul Potts The homeowner should be alert to the following important issues while negotiating with contractors for a new or replacement concrete driveway or sidelwalk: (1.) compaction of the subgrade (2.) quality of the concrete (3.) reinforcement (4.) broom finish (5.) jointing (6.) and the importance of curing concrete. To clarify, cement is a manufactured product that is used to make concrete; the hardened material is referred to as concrete not cement. Combined with a bit of enlightened oversight during construction, the explanations in this article and the specification at the end of the article will
Read More

Collaboration between Architect and Contractor By Paul Potts Introduction Until the 1970s, architects in the United States were immune to construction lawsuits other than those brought by the owner. This allowed the architect to have a significant role during construction to ensure the design intent was realized and to protect the owner from defective workmanship and deficiencies in products without fear of being sued by the contractor. This immunity broke down when jurists and judges began to question whether it was fair to give architects such complete immunity even where personal injury was involved. To make matters worse, during the
Read More