Twitter Google +1 Facebook LinkedIn Share this page RSS

BSCR trial lawyers work closely with clients in the construction industry, helping them find practical solutions by carefully analyzing claims, negotiating agreements and representing them at trial, if necessary. We have extensive experience representing owners, developers, general and specialty contractors, subcontractors, design professionals, lenders, insurers, sureties and other entities in connection with all stages of construction.

When a claim arises, our attorneys are particularly skilled at analyzing the issues efficiently by examining contract balances, pending claims, job site conditions, percentage of work completed, and, issues related to the re-bidding and re-letting of terminated contracts.

In adversarial proceedings, we are effective advocates in many forums, including in arbitrations and mediations, negotiated settlements and in courtroom contests. Our attorneys have experience defending a broad range of disputes, including those involving claims of defective workmanship or design, warranty breaches, delay or disruption, and cumulative impact.

Our attorneys also provide skilled services to construction industry clients in the areas of commercial litigation, employment and labor, personal injury defense, product liability and premises liability.

Our attorneys are active members of professional organizations related to the construction industry. These include the American Bar Association FSLC Construction Law Committee, National Bond Claim Association, and ALFA Construction Practice Group, with some of our attorneys having served in leadership roles.

For more information about the services we provide to the Construction industry contact James Scott Kreamer at 816.471.2121.

Results

Baker Sterchi Cowden & Rice Wins Defense Verdict in Asbestos-Related Matter

After a week-long trial in a St. Louis area court,Baker Sterchi Cowden & Rice won a defense verdict for a flooring subcontractor client in an asbestos-related case in which our client was sued by its general contractor for $1.2 million in damages...

Judgment Obtained for Clients in Mechanic's Lien Case

Following a bench trial in St. Louis County, Missouri, BSCR received a judgment in favor of its clients, Allen Edmonds and Plaza Frontenac, a large upscale shopping mall...

BSCR prevails on appeal of a construction injury claim.

Plaintiff, an employee of a second tier sub-contractor, appealed the granting of summary judgment in favor of our clients, the general contractor and first tier sub-contractor on a project at the University of Missouri Kansas City...

Dismissal entered in favor or BSCR Client in Asbestos Matter

BSCR obtained dismissal for our client, a general contractor, in an asbestos action filed in Madison County, Illinois. Plaintiff alleged the general contractor either manufactured products with asbestos or exposed plaintiff to asbestos fibers during his employment.. . .

Summary Judgment obtained for Construction Manager

BSCR obtained summary judgment in favor of Construction Manager on University of Illinois project. Two electricians brought separate actions alleging damages for personal injuries sustained in an arc flash on the project. . .

BSCR prevails on appeal

The Eastern District of Missouri affirmed judgment in favor of subcontractor in a negligence claim brought by an employee of another subcontractor working on a Washington University project. . .

BSCR Obtains Summary Judgment for Construction Client

BSCR obtained summary judgment on behalf of a General Contractor, Subcontractor, and Subcontractor’s Employee, on a multi-million dollar claim made by an ironworker who claimed to have been injured on a universty project. . .

Summary Judgment Entered in Favor of BSCR Client in Construction Accident Claim

Summary Judgment was granted in favor of BSCR's client in a case involving a bricklayer contractor injuring himself when he slipped into a plumbing ditch dug by a different contractor on the project. Plaintiff sued the second contractor on the project for failing to barricade and/or flag the ditch. . .

Directed Verdict Obtained for Surety Client on Construction Defect Claim

BSCR successfully defended Old Republic Surety, Inc. in a 5 day jury trial involving the construction of running track at a local high school. At the close of plaintiff's evidence the District Court granted Old Republic's motion for directed verdict and entered judgment in favor of Old Republic. . .

BSCR Wins Appeal Before the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals In Hotly Contested Construction Case

A decision from the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a jury verdict obtained by BSCR in favor of its clients MacKenzie House, L.L.C. (developer) and MH Metropolitan, L.L.C., (owner) of a Kansas City apartment complex. Appellant, The Weitz Company (an Iowa-based contractor) was retained as the contractor of the apartment complex and eventually walked off the project after significant delays and cost overruns. . .

Blog Posts

You've Got Mail - Service of Process by Mail is Satisfactory under the Hague Service Convention

05.30.17 | The United States Supreme Court ruled on May 22, 2017, that the Hague Convention, on the service of judicial documents abroad, permits service by mail if the receiving country has not objected to service by mail and service by mail is authorized under otherwise-applicable law.

Missouri Court of Appeals Upholds Acceptance Doctrine to Absolve General Contractor of Premises Liability

04.21.17 | In the case of Wilson v. Dura-Seal and Stripe, the Missouri Court of Appeals for the Eastern District held that the “acceptance doctrine” is still valid law in Missouri, and bars liability against a construction contractor for the injury of a third party after the owner of the premises has accepted the work.

The Daubert Standard - Coming Soon to a Missouri Court Near You

03.31.17 | Earlier this week, Governor Eric Greitens signed Missouri HB 153 into law. HB 153, which supplants Missouri’s existing expert witness standard with that set forth in Federal Rules of Evidence 702, 703, 704 and 705, effectively submits expert testimony in most civil and criminal case to the analysis set forth in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993).

Federal Judges Blow Their Stacks Over Boilerplate Objections

03.27.17 | Within a two-week period, two federal judges issued strongly worded orders denouncing the common practice of asserting boilerplate objections to written discovery.

Employees: Yes, You Can Owe Duties To Your Co-Employees

03.22.17 | The Missouri Court of Appeals rules that a worker may owe an independent duty of care to a co-worker, which is separate and distinct from her employer’s non-delegable duties.

Mere Designation of an Expert Witness Does Not Waive the Work Product Doctrine Protections

11.02.16 | A Missouri plaintiff did not irrevocably waive the protections of the work product doctrine simply by designating an expert witness and then withdrawing the designation without disclosing the expert’s analysis or conclusions.

Constructive Discharge Claims: When Does the 45-Day Period for Initiating Contact with the EEOC Begin to Run?

06.08.16 | On May 23, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the case of Green v. Brennan in order to resolve a split among the Circuits on whether, in an action for constructive discharge, the 45-day limitation period for the employee to initiate contact with the EEOC begins to run after the employer’s last discriminatory act, or at the time of the employee’s resignation.

Proposed MMPA Legislation Would Provide Balance for Businesses and Consumers

02.10.16 | In its current state, the MMPA has allowed consumers to collect substantial verdicts in cases that have strayed from the original intent of lawmakers. SB793 hopes to restore a balance that requires not only that businesses act fairly, but also that consumers act reasonably.

"Excusable neglect" is a real standard requiring real evidence (Updated 01.04.2016)

01.04.16 | While a Kansas court may grant relief from a final judgment based on excusable neglect, it is an abuse of discretion to grant that relief when the party seeking that relief has failed either to explain what facts constituted excusable neglect or to provide any evidence to support that claim.

Appeals Court Affirms Summary Judgment in Favor of Landowner on Premises Liability Claim, Allows Negligence Claim to go Forward

11.30.15 | In Woodall v. Christian Hospital N.E., the Missouri Court of Appeals for the Eastern District affirmed that a landowner does not owe a duty to prevent injury to invitees when the landowner relinquishes possession and control of the premises to an independent contractor during a period of construction.

Missouri Merchandising Practices Act Bars Certain New Home Construction Claims

11.30.15 | Where a Plaintiff who built a new home brought claims including breach of contract and unlawful merchandising practices against the builder, based on purported overcharges, the Plaintiff was equitably estopped from his breach of contract claim arising out of construction in certain areas of the home, because he had accepted the deed, which was construed as satisfaction

The Eighth Circuit Provides Clarity on Outside Sales Exemption and Waiver Requirements under FLSA

04.01.15 | The Eighth Circuit recently analyzed the application of the “outside sales” and “administrative” exemptions under the Fair Labor Standards Act in the context of promotional workers. Also, the Court was asked to decide, for the first time, what constitutes a valid waiver of an employee’s rights under the FLSA.

Prevailing-party agents entitled to attorney's fees

02.09.15 | An agent may recover attorney’s fees when enforcing a principal’s contract if: the agent is granted the express authority to enforce the contract in the contract itself, the contract contains an attorney’s fees provision, and the agent is the prevailing party.

The Supreme Court's Jurisdictional Stretch in Resolving the Evidence Needed to Support a CAFA Removal

01.06.15 | A defendant removing a case to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act need not provide evidence proving the jurisdictional amount in controversy in the notice of removal. A “short and plain statement of the grounds for removal” is sufficient.

The Missouri Supreme Court Rules That Parties May Have a Duty as a Joint Employer With Its Contractors Pursuant to the Missouri Minimum Wage Law

09.19.14 | Individuals and businesses relying upon contractors to provide labor services may be exposing themselves to liability if these contractors fail to pay their employees in accordance with the Missouri Minimum Wage Law.

In a differential etiology, experts need not rule out all possible causes

06.23.14 | Experts are not required to rule out all possible causes when performing the differential etiology analysis if the experts have properly ruled in the alleged cause.

Punitive Damages Part 1: Don't Get Caught Flat-Footed

04.29.14 | A Kansas plaintiff may amend their pleadings to assert punitive damages up until the day of the pretrial conference.

Workers' Compensation + Retaliation = Missouri Supreme Court adopts the "contributing factor" standard

04.22.14 | A man who sued his former employer, alleging he was discharged in retaliation for filing a workers' compensation claim, appealed on the basis that the trial court used a jury instruction with the wrong standard. In a 5-2 decision written by Judge George W. Draper III, the Missouri Supreme Court rejected the 'exclusive causation' standard and replaced it with the "contributing factor" standard. On remand and in future cases, the jury must determine whether the plaintiff's filing of a workers' compensation claim was a "contributing factor" to his or her discharge.

Kansas abolishes assumption of the risk defense.

04.21.14 | Based on its adoption of a statutory scheme of comparative negligence, Kansas has abolished common law assumption of the risk as a bar to recovery. Simmons v. Porter, 298 Kan. 299, 312 P3d 345, 355 (Kan. 2013).

A mundane lesson from an important decision, or, the importance of presenting evidence

03.20.14 | The plaintiff has the burden of proving standing, which is a jurisdictional issue that can be raised at any time.