Monthly Archives: May 2017

May 31, 2017

From Cow Town to Innovative Agribusiness Epicenter: Here Comes the National Western Stock Show Project

By: Sean Hanlon

Denver’s first Stock Show took place in 1906.  As an emerging city, Denver was often referred to as a “Cow Town.”  A lot has changed since 1906.  The National Western Stock Show continues to thrive, buts its National Western Complex is showing its age.

Enter the National Western Stock Show Project.  The Stock Show Project is focused on creating a global agribusiness epicenter that will attract private companies and public organizations to collaborate on solving long developing problems associated with food, animal health, and water.  A global think tank of sorts.  The expanding complex will also have a new livestock center, a new equestrian center (with 1,000 permanent stalls), a new expo hall, and a new arena. The Stock Show Project—expected to cost more than $1 billion—will result in a 250-acre campus containing a unique cross-pollination of industries.  Expected to span a decade,  the Stock Show Project will be completed in phases, and will not interrupt the annual Stock Show event which will continue during the renovations.


May 23, 2017

Construction Defect Reform in CO; HB 1279: Pluses, Pitfalls & Practical Pointers

By: Rebecca Dow

Construction defect litigation reform will take a small step forward this week when Gov. John Hickenlooper signs HB 1279 on May 23, 2017.  HB 1279 will go into effect immediately after signature by the Governor, and developers and residential builders will need to be aware of certain aspects of the law.  HB 1279 has been much touted as a bipartisan effort toward addressing the housing squeeze in Colorado, as reflected by just 3.4 percent of new housing starts in 2016 being for sale condominiums in the Denver metro area.  HB 1279 passed unanimously by both the House and the Senate on May 4, 2107. This is the first piece of legislation passed in the last several years to address any aspect of construction defect litigation reform, although during that time more robust construction defect reform ordinances have been passed by approximately 12 cities and counties in Colorado. HB 1279 offers some pluses to developers/builders, but also contains some pitfalls, as discussed below.  Finally, this article will provide some practical pointers for residential construction under HB 1279.


May 16, 2017

Those contractual protections that you bargained for might be void

By: Tim Gordon

Building a mixed-use project?  If so, Colorado law might render void some of the contractual protections that you bargained for.

In Broomfield Senior Living Owner, LLC v. R.G. Brinkmann Co., 2017 COA 31, reh’g denied (Apr. 20, 2017), a division of the Colorado Court of Appeals had to decide whether certain construction defects claims brought by a project owner were untimely.  The project was a senior assisted and independent living facility (senior facility).  The construction contract (an AIA form) contained three separate accrual provisions with respect to claims:  Claims arising from acts or failures to act (1) occurring before substantial completion accrue no later than the date of substantial completion; (2) occurring between substantial completion and final payment certificate accrue no later than the final payment certificate issuance date; and (3) occurring after final payment accrue no later than the time provided in the warranty provisions.  Applying the contract language, the trial court entered summary judgment in the contractor’s favor and ruled that the construction defects claims at issue accrued on the date of substantial completion and were therefor barred.


May 2, 2017

ASBCA dismisses two claims against Lockheed Martin based on “Plainly Invalid Legal Theory”

In late December 2016, the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (“ASBCA”) dismissed two claims that had been lodged against Lockheed Martin Integrated Systems, Inc. (“Lockheed Martian”) by the United States Army based on the government’s reliance on a “plainly invalid legal theory.” See ASBCA No. 59508, 2016 WL 7655944 (Dec. 20, 2016).  The decision, which consolidated Lockheed Martin’s appeal of two contracting officer’s final decisions, concerned claims by the government for alleged breach of contract by Lockheed Martin in the amounts of $102,294,891.00 and $14,494,740.00, respectively.  Each of these claims arose out of an audit in 2014 by the Defense Contract Audit Agency that found work performed by Lockheed Martin subcontractors was not appropriately backed up or substantiated.