Identifying and Quantifying Government Contract Claims
Government Contract Changes and Modifications - Webinar
Coverage Litigation Leapfrog: Why Venue Matters and How to Avoid Pre-emptive Strike Actions
Troutman Pepper COVID-19 Legal Issues Podcast Series: COVID-19 Commercial Leasing Trends (Part Two)
Will COVID-19 Qualify as a ‘Material Adverse Effect’?
Making Effective Use of the Claims/Disputes Process
FCPA Compliance and Ethics Report-Episode 45, Interview with Justice Ken Wise
In Sze Fung Engineering Limited v Trevi Construction Company Limited [2025] HKCA 278, the Hong Kong Court of Appeal (“CA”) ruled that the “back to back” wording in that case was not a “pay when paid” clause, but governed only...more
South Carolina contractors need to be aware of a recent decision by the South Carolina Court of Appeals that clarifies the landscape for indemnity provisions in contracts and introduces critical consideration regarding the...more
In Hall v. Rag-O-Rama, LLC, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit affirmed the decision of a district court that rejected Sally Hall’s breach of contract claims based on a poorly worded contract provision. The 6th...more
Under Louisiana law, does the operator’s bad faith preclude recovery for the non-operator’s breach of a joint operating agreement if the operator caused the non-operator to breach the JOA but did not itself breach?...more
FRAUNHOFER-GESELLSCHAFT v. SIRIUS XM RADIO INC. Before Dyk, Linn, and Taranto. Appeal from the District of Delaware. Summary: Contract interpretation must be applied in determining whether a sublicense survives...more
Recall the Battle of the Bastards: The heroic Lady Sansa and the duplicitous Lord Baelish gallop over the hill to save the foolish Jon Snow from the heinous Ramsey Bolton. In similar fashion, but without the malnourished...more
North Shore Energy v. Harkins interpreted an Option Agreement between landowners and a producer over a 400 acre tract. In football they would say the Texas Supreme Court pancaked the plaintiff. In the law, some would call it...more
On Monday, the Colorado Supreme Court issued its decision in American Family Mut. Ins. Co. v. Hansen, No. 14SC99 (Colo. June 20, 2016), holding that extrinsic evidence can only be used to interpret ambiguous policy language,...more
A federal district court in Arkansas recently examined provisions of a Broker Authorization Agreement between a reinsurance broker (Global Risk) and a ceding insurer (Aetna). In denying cross-motions for summary judgment on...more