Subway Wins Latest Round Of 15-Year Construction Litigation Saga
Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.15.05
After 15 years of litigation, two trials and the deaths of two judges, Chief Judge Hogan of the U.S. District Court in D.C. wrote the latest chapter in the subway litigation saga, Mergentime-Perini v. WMATA (11/28/05), issuing a 192-page opinion upholding the default terminations of contracts for two Washington Metro subway stations, denying virtually all of the contractors' claims and awarding WMATA over $21 million in excess reprocurement costs and other damages, plus prejudgment interest. Crowell & Moring has represented WMATA in this protracted litigation, which has already established precedent on such issues as whether performance bonds cover allegedly unauthorized contract modifications and the duties of successor judges who take over an uncompleted case after trial.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 11.14.25
Claim construction is a key stage of most patent litigations, where the court must decide the meaning of any disputed terms in the patent claims. Generally, claim terms are given their plain and ordinary meaning except under two circumstances: (1) when the patentee acts as its own lexicographer and sets out a definition for the term; and (2) when the patentee disavows the full scope of the term either in the specification or during prosecution. Thorner v. Sony Comput. Ent. Am. LLC, 669 F.3d 1362, 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2012). The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Aortic Innovations LLC v. Edwards Lifesciences Corp. highlights that patentees can act as their own lexicographers through consistent, interchangeable usage of terms across the specification, effectively defining terms by implication.
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.14.25
Microplastics Update: Regulatory and Litigation Developments in 2025
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.13.25
