Columnist Steven Nudelman highlights the importance of understanding arbitration as a binding dispute resolution method and the potential limitations on legal rights when accepting digital contracts.

Every relationship, whether personal or business, starts with high expectations and the hope that everything will go smoothly as planned.

In litigation, courts view the failure to take discovery obligations seriously, such as failing to preserve electronically stored information.

Since April 23, when the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced its final rule regarding noncompete clauses, I have received numerous calls and emails asking if such clauses are no longer binding and effective. 

A pending federal copyright infringement lawsuit may be of particular significance for plumbing design professionals.

Understanding waivers of subrogation and their effect on the contractor and subcontractor allows parties to construction contracts to better allocate their risk and negotiate the contract price. It is crucial to consult insurers before entering into such an agreement.

Maybe it’s me, but nothing rings in the new year quite like a new batch of compliance regulations.

On September 12, 2023, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia issued its opinion in American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc., holding that non-commercial use of standards incorporated by reference into law is fair use and not copyright infringement.

When it comes to arbitration in a contract dispute, it is important to remember to read the contract. Courts give parties wide latitude to structure their own arbitration agreement. Parties may agree on arbitration as a method of dispute resolution, the specific rules to be followed and the scope.

Looking back to a case from 1973, Steven Nudelman explains this negligence claim where a contractor was forced to pay for additional materials and labor because of an architect’s errors and omissions.