Board of Commissioners of Jefferson County v. Teton Corporation, et al. - 11/21/13

Back to TopPrintE-mail
Thursday  November 21, 2013 
1:30 PM  EST

1:30 p.m. 72A04-1302-CT-55. The Jefferson County Board of Commissioners (“County Commissioners”) entered into a standard American Institute of Architects contract (“AIA contract”) with Teton Corporation for renovations to the Jefferson County Courthouse.  The AIA contract required the County Commissioners to provide builder’s risk insurance for the renovation project, but the County Commissioners decided to rely on the general policy of insurance maintained by Jefferson County instead, and did not notify Teton Corporation that they did not obtain the insurance coverage required by the AIA contract. The AIA contract between the parties also provided for a mutual waiver of the right to subrogation between and among the County Commissioners, Teton Corporation, and all subcontractors.

A fire during the renovation caused significant damage to the courthouse.  The County Commissioners filed a complaint against Teton and its subcontractors arguing that the County was entitled to damages not covered by insurance and to “non-Work property damage.”  Summary judgment proceedings ensued, and the trial court granted Teton’s and its subcontractors’ motions for summary judgment.  The County Commissioners appeal and argue that although under the AIA contract they waived their subrogation claims for damages to “work property”, they may still claim damages to “non-Work property” and litigate whether they may also claim for damages caused by gross negligence or willful and wanton acts.

Back to Events
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. As one of the many consumers affected by this breach, I found my bank data had been lifted and used to buy over $200 of various merchandise in New York. I did a pretty good job of tracing the purchases to stores around a college campus just from the info on my bank statement. Hm. Mr. Hill, I would like my $200 back! It doesn't belong to the state, in my opinion. Give it back to the consumers affected. I had to freeze my credit and take out data protection, order a new debit card and wait until it arrived. I deserve something for my trouble!

  2. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  3. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  4. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  5. Different rules for different folks....

ADVERTISEMENT