The 'Lien-Ability' of Field Change Directives Under Typical Construction Lien Laws? – July 6, 2016
Pepper Hamilton
Description
violation of a Lien Law for the contractor to file a construction lien that includes unpaid
amounts billed pursuant to a written field change directive that sets forth a method for
calculating the changed price.
Endnotes Example
1 Field change directives are also often referred to as construction change directives,
field change authorizations or other nomenclature defined by contract. The
ConsensusDocs® 200 refers to them as “Interim Directed Changes.”
2 Patock Const. v. GVK Enters.
, 372 N.J. Super. 380, 386 (App.
Div. 2004) (quoting Legge Indus. v.
Joseph Kushner Hebrew Acad./JKHA , 333 N.J. Super. 537, 562 (App. Div.
2000)). 3 Craft v. Stevenson Lumber Yard, 179 N.J. Super.
56, 67 (2004) (quoting Thomas Group, Inc. v. Wharton Senior Citizen Hous., Inc.
, 163 N.J. 507, 517 (2000)). 4 Id. at 68.
See also Thomas Group, 163 N.J. at 517-19 (stating that the lien statutes “are designed to guarantee effective security to those who furnish labor or materials used to enhance the value of property of others and, where the terms of the statute reasonably permit, the law should be construed to effect this remedial purpose”) (emphasis added). 5 J. Charles Sheak & Timothy J.
Korzun, Old Game, New Rules: A Brief Guide to 1987 Changes in the A.I.A. A201, General Conditions of the Contract for Construction, 8-AUG Construction Law 3, 5 (1988) (noting the amendment to A.I.A. Form A201, which incorporated a construction change directive provision, is in accord with the industry standard to use such directives during the course of a project). The material in this publication was created as of the date set forth above and is based on laws, court decisions, administrative rulings and congressional materials that existed at that time, and should not be construed as legal advice or legal opinions on specific facts.
The information in this publication is not intended to create, and the transmission and receipt of it does not constitute, a lawyer-client relationship. Copyright © 2016 Pepper Hamilton LLP Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | Attorney Advertising Contact Us: phinfo@pepperlaw.com or 866.737.7372 | Brand design by Greenfield/Belser Ltd. Convert webpages or entire websites to PDF - Use PDFmyURL! .
, 372 N.J. Super. 380, 386 (App.
Div. 2004) (quoting Legge Indus. v.
Joseph Kushner Hebrew Acad./JKHA , 333 N.J. Super. 537, 562 (App. Div.
2000)). 3 Craft v. Stevenson Lumber Yard, 179 N.J. Super.
56, 67 (2004) (quoting Thomas Group, Inc. v. Wharton Senior Citizen Hous., Inc.
, 163 N.J. 507, 517 (2000)). 4 Id. at 68.
See also Thomas Group, 163 N.J. at 517-19 (stating that the lien statutes “are designed to guarantee effective security to those who furnish labor or materials used to enhance the value of property of others and, where the terms of the statute reasonably permit, the law should be construed to effect this remedial purpose”) (emphasis added). 5 J. Charles Sheak & Timothy J.
Korzun, Old Game, New Rules: A Brief Guide to 1987 Changes in the A.I.A. A201, General Conditions of the Contract for Construction, 8-AUG Construction Law 3, 5 (1988) (noting the amendment to A.I.A. Form A201, which incorporated a construction change directive provision, is in accord with the industry standard to use such directives during the course of a project). The material in this publication was created as of the date set forth above and is based on laws, court decisions, administrative rulings and congressional materials that existed at that time, and should not be construed as legal advice or legal opinions on specific facts.
The information in this publication is not intended to create, and the transmission and receipt of it does not constitute, a lawyer-client relationship. Copyright © 2016 Pepper Hamilton LLP Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | Attorney Advertising Contact Us: phinfo@pepperlaw.com or 866.737.7372 | Brand design by Greenfield/Belser Ltd. Convert webpages or entire websites to PDF - Use PDFmyURL! .
