Our Clients
Our Business and Contracting Experience
Our Employment and Labor Experience
Our Litigation Experience
Our Start-to-Finish Capabilities
Our Client Successes

Our Clients
Stradley Ronon attorneys represent clients in every aspect of construction law, including site acquisition, construction financing, construction and design document preparation and negotiation, construction litigation, alternative dispute resolution, and employment and labor matters. Our clients include:

• national and regional contractors and construction managers, including general contractors and specialty contractors 
  
  
• subcontractors and building products suppliers 
  
  
• architects, engineers and other design professionals 
  
  
• sureties 
  
  
• construction lenders
  
  
• institutional property owners, including hospitals and health systems, colleges and universities, schools and churches 
  
  
• shopping center operators 
  
  
• commercial office landlords 
  
  
• corporate campus owners 
  
  
• commercial and residential developers 
  
  
• insurance companies
  

Our Litigation Experience
For decades, Stradley Ronon has represented construction-related entities and individuals in all facets of construction litigation. From arguing pivotal legal matters to addressing challenging technical issues, our attorneys have represented clients in claims involving:

• acceleration and constructive acceleration 
  
  
• bid protests 
  
  
• contract extras 
  
  
• defaults/terminations 
  
  
• defective building products 
  
  
• defective workmanship 
  
  
• delayed performance 
  
  
• design errors or omissions 
  
  
• differing site conditions
  
  
• insurance coverage disputes 
  
  
• liquidated damages claims 
  
  
• lost productivity claims 
  
  
• lost profits 
  
  
• mechanics’ liens 
  
  
• payment bond claims 
  
  
• performance bond claims 
  
  
• supply bond claims 
  
  
• union and labor disputes
  

Our Employment and Labor Experience
We counsel clients on all matters pertaining to employment and labor-related issues, including:

• advising contractors on the use of non-union and union labor 
  
  
• providing counsel on union threats to close down a project, enjoining picketers at a job site and obtaining injunctions to prevent picketing 
  
  
• advising on employment-related matters such as employee dismissal, employee contracts and employee layoffs and transfers 
  
  
• advising on union jurisdictional disputes
  

Our Business and Contracting Experience
We represent clients on a variety of construction-related matters, including: 

• drafting and creating client-specific libraries of standardized construction and design contracts, as well as providing training and advising in using and implementing the standardized contract forms 
  
  
• advising clients on the use of AIA, AGC and other standard industry contract templates 
  
  
• preparing and assisting clients with RFPs, RFIs and RFQs 
  
  
• representing Saint Joseph’s University in connection with zoning approvals and development agreements covering a new dormitory building, together with financing through a tax-exempt bond issuance through the Pennsylvania Higher
  Educational Facilities Authority and supported by Letters of Credit 
  
  
• representing the Archdiocese of Philadelphia with several tax exempt financings, the most significant of which as a $30 million public bond issue for construction of the new Bishop Shanahan High School 
  
  
• handling all aspects of land acquisition, zoning and land development approvals, primary and subordinate acquisition and construction financing, and the negotiation of all design and construction contracts, including the oversight of a public bidding process for four multi-part prime contracts 
  
  
• representing a college in connection with the renovation of a historical mansion into a student residence and the construction of a new fitness center 
  
  
• providing advice on mechanics’ rights and lien avoidance 
  
  
• representing contractors and property owners in connection with state and local governmental permits and approvals, and providing advice on building code-compliance issues 
  
  
• preparing and/or reviewing, negotiating and supplementing the full spectrum of construction and design agreements 
  
  
• advising contractors and design professionals on corporate formation and organizational matters 
  
  
• representing owners and lenders in construction financing
  

Our Start-to-Finish Capabilities
Stradley Ronon’s construction practice group is comprised of lawyers knowledgeable in business and litigation environments, enabling us to offer clients the breadth and experience to handle all legal aspects of any construction project.

Because many construction disputes are multifaceted — involving claims and counterclaims asserted by and against many parties and third-parties — a number of them end up in more than one court, or across both the courthouse and arbitration forums. Stradley Ronon attorneys have handled these complex and inter-connected disputes in courtrooms and forums — including mediations and arbitrations — across the mid-Atlantic region.

Whether there are concerns about potential liability, adequate cost controls in a prospective construction project or disputes that arise during or after the course of construction, Stradley Ronon attorneys have the experience and the broad interdisciplinary perspective to handle any construction-related matter.

Our Client Successes
Some of the group’s more recent litigation successes include:

• SBW, Inc. v. Ernest Bock & Sons, Inc., U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, No. 07-4119, March 17, 2009 - Our attorneys convinced a federal court interpreting New Jersey law that a surety cannot be liable for the bad faith denial of a surety bond claim. This decision reversed the only other case from New Jersey on the subject.
  
  
• University of Pittsburgh v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., et al., Pa. Court of Common Pleas (Allegheny Cty.), No. GD-04-029062 - Our attorneys successfully moved the trial court to rule that the Pennsylvania Procurement Code prohibited the assignment by the Pennsylvania Department of General Services of its rights under a performance bond to the University of Pittsburgh, and therefore, the University lacked standing to assert a bond claim. 
  
  
• Havens Steel Company v. Driscoll/Hunt, A Joint Venture, United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Mo., 2007 - Our attorneys dismissed purported pass-through claims of a construction manager (CM), in which the CM attempted to assert against its steel subcontractor, on grounds that: (1) subcontractors with whom the claims originated had no privity with the steel subcontractor and, thus, the subcontractors held no claims against the steel subcontractor to assign to the CM; and (2) the claims were not “pass-through” claims because the CM was not asserting the damaged subcontractors’ claims against the project owner, but the steel subcontractor outside the line of privity. 
  
  
• Multi-Phase, Inc. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., et. al., (CCP Phila. Co. 2007) - Our lawyers dismissed a performance bond obligee’s claims for damages allegedly caused by the bond principal’s delay in progress of work, as such damages were not covered by the performance bond issued by USF&G.
  
  
• Donald M Durkin Contracting, Inc. v. City of Newark, 2006 WL 2724882 (D. Del. 2006) - Our attorneys defended against a claim that the general contractor defaulted on a construction agreement based on the owner’s failure to satisfy the notice to cure requirements of the construction contract. Stradley Ronon lawyers succeeded in having the surety dismissed on that basis, and the contractor went on to obtain a $36 million verdict for wrongful termination.
  
  
• Guy Cooper Inc. v. East Penn School District v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty, (CCP Lehigh Co., 2005); aff'd 903 A.2d 609 (Pa. Cmwlth 2006) - Our attorneys represented a contractor, architect and surety in a case of first impression. The joinder complaint against our client was dismissed on the grounds that the construction contract’s no-damage-for-delay provision precluded joinder in all circumstances. 
  
  
• Samuel Grossi & Sons, Inc. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., et al., 2006 WL 3307465 (CCP Phila. Co., 2006) – Our attorneys represented USF&G in a payment of bond claim where the court dismissed payment of the bond claimant’s damages allegedly caused by other’s delay in progress of work, as such damages were not covered by the payment bond issued by USF&G.