|
July/August 2016 (Issue 10)
News and analysis for construction professionals, including architects, engineers, product manufacturers, owners, contractors, insurers and sureties.
|
|
|
New Paid Sick/Safety Leave Affects Most Employees who Work More than 80 Hours per year in Minneapolis
|
On May 27, 2016, the Minneapolis City Council passed a new ordinance that affects employers with six or more employees working in Minneapolis. This includes contractors with employees working on projects located in Minneapolis. The ordinance provides that an employee accrues one hour of paid leave for every 30 hours worked, up to 48 hours of accrued leave per year. These paid leave hours can carry over to the next year, up to a total of 80 accrued hours. An employee can use the leave for their own or a qualifying family member's mental and physical illness, injury, or diagnostic or preventive care.
Of note is the fact that the ordinance applies to employees who work in Minneapolis even if the employer is not located in Minneapolis. In addition, the law applies to workers who work in the city only on a sporadic basis, so long as they spend 80 or more hours per year working in the city. These employees, such as contractor laborers, drivers or service/repair workers, accumulate paid leave for each hour worked in Minneapolis.
The new ordinance is effective July 1, 2017. Employers are advised to start evaluating how the new ordinance may affect their company. Those employers who have workers who travel in and out of Minneapolis during their workday will need to consider options for tracking time spent in the city.
|
Grefe Constr., Inc. v. Double J Concrete & Masonry, Inc.
This is a negligent installation case where Grefe Construction, the general contractor, sought contribution from Double J Concrete & Masonry for amounts allocated to Grefe for water intrusion damage to a home. The homeowners contracted with Grefe for remodel and construction services on a lake home, and Grefe hired Double J to install stone veneer siding to the home. Grefe argued on appeal that the district court erroneously granted summary judgment for Double J because evidence showed that the International Residential Code (IRC) was subject to alternative interpretations based on the facts of this case.
The court of appeals upheld the district court's summary judgment order, reasoning that the determination of which section of the IRC applied to stone veneer siding installation was a matter of statutory interpretation - a question of law - appropriate for the district court to determine on summary judgment. The court of appeals also affirmed the district court's determination that any notations by a building code inspector indicating a different interpretation of the IRC was irrelevant because the language of the IRC is unambiguous, therefore "the district court was not required to consider or give deference to the building official's interpretation of the IRC." The court of appeals upheld the district court's refusal to consider expert testimony on the applicable section of the IRC, as well as expert testimony regarding the equivalency of materials used by the respondent with other materials required in different sections of the IRC, for the same reason: "[T]he interpretation of the IRC is a legal issue, and expert testimony is unnecessary to determine the applicable standard of care under the IRC."
|
Tony's Constr. v. Kraus-Anderson Construction Co., St. Louis Cnty. Sch.- ISD #2142
In this case, Tony's Construction, a construction subcontractor on a school renovation project, appealed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendant school, ISD #2142, on its claims for quantum meruit, quasi-contract, unjust enrichment, and promissory estoppel. Tony's had performed several change orders on the project - in a manner that did not conform with its subcontract - for which it was not paid and for which it later sued various parties. The court dismissed the first three claims because there was no evidence that the school district benefited from the subcontractor's work through illegal, unlawful, or unjust means, and dismissed the fourth claim because there was no evidence of a promise between the parties.
The court of appeals upheld the district court's dismissal of Tony's claims against the school district. The district court determined that Kraus-Anderson and Tony's agreed on a system whereby Tony's would complete change orders in a manner outside the manner described in its contract with the general contractor. The district court also determined that Kraus-Anderson acted as the school district's agent on the project. But because Tony's previously dismissed its claims against Kraus-Anderson, the agent, it effectively dismissed all claims against the school district and the principal. Because it could not recover against the principal for claims it had dismissed against the agent, the Court concluded that the school district was entitled to summary judgment on Tony's claims against it.
|
|
OSHA: Protecting Workers in Confined Spaces
Educational program sponsored by Minnesota Subcontractors Association
Tuesday, October 11, 2016
7:30 -11:00 am
Check-in/ Breakfast/Networking 7:30 - 8:00 am
Program 8:00 - 10:30 am
Networking 10:30 - 11:00 am
To learn more or to register for this event, please visit the Minnesota Subcontractors Association website.
|
Established in Minneapolis in 1929, Meagher & Geer has earned a reputation as one of the leading litigation defense and insurance coverage firms in the Upper Midwest. We offer 80 lawyers in 20 practice areas. From our offices in Minneapolis, Minnesota, Bismarck, ND, and Phoenix, Arizona we represent businesses of all sizes, public entities, non-profit organizations, and individuals.
Our nationally recognized trial lawyers have taken more than 125 cases to verdict since 2007. During the same period, our appellate lawyers have handled more than 120 appeals in state and federal courts. At last count we represented more than 125 of the leading insurance companies in the U.S., and we also handle work for insurers based in London, Canada and Bermuda.
Our attorneys are licensed in many states, including Arizona, California, Georgia, Iowa, Illinois, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin.
|
|
| 
QUICK LINKS |
|
|
|
