No Prime Liability = No Pass-Through
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 05.06.08
The Court of Federal Claims in Harper/Nielsen Dillingham, Builders v. U.S. (Apr. 29, 2008) denied a contractor's suit against the government in which it sought to pass through subcontractor claims for cost increases caused by government delays. The court acknowledged that the "Severin doctrine" allows such pass-through claims when the prime contractor is potentially liable to its subcontractor for the damages, but here found the prime could not be liable because the subcontract included an "iron-bound bar" against such liability due to a "no damage for delay" clause.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 01.14.26
PFAS Reporting Gets Real in 2026
State regulation of PFAS-containing products will ramp up significantly in 2026. Most notably, companies will have to comply with Minnesota’s sweeping new product-reporting requirements. As we explain below, Minnesota’s requirements cast a wide net, capturing companies that may not sell products directly into the state. This and other features of the state’s reporting program are likely to present significant compliance challenges for a wide range of businesses.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 01.13.26
Client Alert | 7 min read | 01.13.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 01.13.26
