 | Weekly Opinion Summaries
Construction Cases |  | | January 20-26, 2012 FindLaw.com Weekly Construction Newsletter | | You may forward this e-mail in its entirety.
Table of Contents Construction Cases FindLaw's case summaries are copyrighted material and are not intended for republication without prior approval. You may, however, freely redistribute this e-mail in its entirety. To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com.
Construction Cases United States Third Circuit, 01/24/2012
Mabey Bridge & Shore, Inc. v. Schoch, No. 11-1406
In a suit by a corporation engaged in the business of supplying temporary steel bridges for construction projects, seeking a declaration that the Pennsylvania Steel Products Procurement Act, as interpreted and enforced by the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT), is unconstitutional, and requesting a preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining PennDOT from prohibiting the use of the company's temporary bridges on its projects, the district court's grant of summary judgment against the company on all its claims is affirmed, where: 1) the state Steel Act was not preempted by the federal Buy America Act and related federal regulations; 2) the Steel Act is not unconstitutional under the dormant Commerce Clause; 3) PennDOT's actions did not violate the Contract Clause; and 4) PennDOT's application of the Steel Act did not violate the Equal Protection Clause. Read more... United States Ninth Circuit, 01/20/2012
CRM Collateral II, Inc. v. TriCounty Metropolitan Transportation Dist. of Oregon, No. 10-36090
In proceedings following default on a standby letter of credit, the district court's disposition of the case on cross-motions for summary judgment is reversed and the case remanded, where: 1) the district court incorrectly concluded that the applicant for the letter of credit was a surety and erroneously permitted it to assert the defense of discharge; and 2) the applicant was not entitled to an award of damages because the beneficiary's draw on the letter of credit did not violate the statutory warranty to the applicant that the drawing did not violate any agreement between the applicant and the beneficiary. Read more... Supreme Court of California, 01/23/2012
Rossa v. D.L. Falk Construction, Inc., No. S183523
In a suit in which a defendant sought to recover the interest it paid on the sums it borrowed to secure a bank�s letter of credit on an appeal bond, the court of appeal's judgment that the interest was not recoverable is affirmed, as California Rules of Court, rule 8.278(d)(1)(F) does not extend to interest expenses incurred to borrow funds to provide security for a letter of credit. Read more...
 FindLaw includes summaries of all Supreme and Appellate Court slip opinions posted on the official Illinois Courts site. FindLaw summaries include opinions that have not yet been released for publication and may be subject to modification, correction or withdrawal. Check the Illinois Courts site to determine if a specific opinion has been released before relying on that case as precedent.
Feedback
We value your comments! Please take a moment to tell us what you think by sending us an e-mail. | Subscription Information
Click here to subscribe to a FindLaw Newsletter. To unsubscribe, click here. | Advertising Information
For more information about advertising in FindLaw Newsletters, click here. | | 800 W. California Ave., Sunnyvale, CA 94086 |
| | |
You are currently subscribed to ccc-construction as: 4bloggermail@gmail.com .
To manage your newsletter accounts go to: http://newsletters.findlaw.com/sub/review-account.jsp
