Virginia Real Estate, Land Use & Construction Law : Virginia Construction Lawyers & Attorneys : Bean Kinney & Korman Law Firm : VA Real Estate, Land Use & Zoning

My friend Vickie Pynchon recently posted at Chris Hill's blog, Construction Law Musings, on "How to Get Sued".  On the flip side, there are some simple pointers that all individuals and entities can follow that will dramatically reduce the chances of being sued.  These tips apply across a spectrum of businesses and are certainly not limited to just construction, real estate and land use.

1.  Be likable.  It is a lot harder to sue a friend.  If you maintain a friendly, warm relationship and the other side genuinely likes you, it is very difficult to cross the threshold of considering suit, let along filing one.

2.  Failing that, at least be palatable and not obnoxious.  On some level, likability and personality are somewhat pre-wired and we may not all be blessed with the so-called "winning personality".  It is clearly within most of our ability to avoid being confrontational, impolite or nasty.  Those traits make it real easy to turn a dispute personal and into trench litigation warfare.

3.  Be honest and maintain credibility.  Understand that if you get caught even in somewhat meaningless falsehoods, they come at the price of your credibility throughout the deal.  Many lawsuits flow from the plaintiff losing trust in the honesty of their opponent.

4.  Play nice.  Taking extreme advantage during a deal may feel like a good move at the time, but it can create an atmosphere that calls for payback.  Building a relationship of shared mutual success and teamwork can help smooth over differences of viewpoint during performance of contracts.

5.  Be organized.  Expensive, protracted and risky litigation looks a lot less attractive if your opponent looks like they have their act together and can or may win.  Sending the message that you are well organized throughout a contract can help create that impression.

6.  Document, document, document.  This may be the most important substantive point, as opposed to personality driven point, of all.  My career is littered with cases fraught with peril due to the failure of clients or opponents to document decisions, conversations, agreements, or notices.  In the era of instantaneous e-mail transmission, there is no excuse for why you failed to drop a quick line confirming what turns out to be the pivotal facts once you get into litigation.  Sending that timely confirmation is a great investment in avoiding litigation.

Image:  Yale University Art Gallery

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (7)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

One of the more intriguing and rewarding aspects of our recent entry into the legal blogging and social media arena has been the rapid development of conversations and connections with interesting people.  Two of these friendships have led to cross-posts on a pair of our friend's blogs.

We have been friendly with Chris Hill at Construction Law Musings for some time before the launch of our blog.  Not only has Chris been a tremendous source of information, support, and helpful advice during our first fledgling steps, but we have enjoyed an extended dialogue on various topics, blog posts, and twitter.  Chris invited us to guest post at Construction Law Musings and you can see that post today, Yes, Virginia, Contract Terms Do Matter: Financing Term Offers Owner an Escape Hatch.

The "Six Degrees of Separation" style of internet interrelationships has led from Chris to dialogue with the Build2Sustain group.  The Build2Sustain blog in particular is home to some intriguing and important discussions regarding the development process.  Those discussions, on both the blog and twitter, have in turn led to us getting to know Yahya Henry.  Yahya has extensive development and real estate experience and brings not only a passion for sustainability, but a solid understanding of the business end of the equation. 

Amongst many interests and pursuits, Yayha is currently Director of Business Development for The Aribra Group, LLC.  The Aribra Group is an online commuity promoting sustainable development.  Yayha invited us to join the conversation at The Aribra Group and recently reprinted one of our LEED related posts, LEEDing to Unintended Consequences - The Ghost of LEED Future.

We appreciate the chance to reach out and extend our dialogue and look forward to such discussions in the future.  For those interested in more rapid dialogue, you can follow us all on Twitter: Timothy R. Hughes can be found @vaconstruction, Chris Hill can be found @constructionlaw, and Yayha Henry can be found @yahyahenry.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (4)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The recent New York Times piece criticizing LEED (discussed previously) has reignited discussion of the potential for decertification after initial issuance of LEED certification. Some previously pointed to the USGBC addition of extended energy reporting for five years after occupancy as a "Minimum Performance Requirement" and the threat of decertification as an enforcement mechanism.  More recently, commentators have predicted recertification programs.  Rich Cartlidge even called for a wedding between LEED for New Construction and LEED for Existing Buildings.

The USGBC changes must be viewed against the backdrop of the development of international, state and local building codes and even Congressional legislation.  Codified efficiency standards would clearly and immediately raise the minimum energy bar across the board and reduce or eliminate some of the arguments raised by the Times article.  Reducing compliance to clear codes may also reduce in part the increasingly complex interface between local authorities interpreting prescriptive codes and the interpretive voluntary third party organization subject to little if any legal challenge or appeal (commented on previously by Chris Hill).   LEED as a voluntary tool has succeeded in driving the dialogue and advancing knowledge of green building.  LEED as a remotely delegated code interpretative structure with limited avenues of legal challenge is far more complicated.

With regards to code based approaches to energy efficiency, at least one local energy code has been passed and partially tested ... and stopped dead in its tracks (at least temporarily). The City of Albuquerque passed its own building code with energy efficiency standards. In granting a preliminary injunction blocking application of the code, a federal district court judge made the preliminary finding that it was more likely than not the challenger would prevail based on an argument that Congress had spoken on energy efficiency and that the federal statutes preempted state or local action.

The City of Albuquerque case reached the preliminary finding of federal preemption despite the fact that when Congress passed its energy efficiency measures, it included an express limited caveat that excluded building codes from preemption. The case is still pending, so the ultimate result is up in the air. The case does, however, offer a roadmap to those seeking to challenge statewide and local building code efforts to impose energy efficiency standards.

Given these complexities, it may be simpler for proponents of increased efficiency to do so at the federal level. The Waxman-Markley bill (described as the cap and trade bill by some, by others as The Illiad) includes significant increases in required energy efficiency requirements. While these standards have received extensive attention and commentary from green building bloggers, the press and public discussion of these aspects of the bill have been almost strangely silent.

The interplay of these issues raise a number of questions, particularly if proponents are successful at incorporating energy efficiency standards into federal or state statutes:

• If LEED in fact incorporates recertification and/or on-going performance requirements, will it reach the tipping point where owners and end-users push back on fees and process?
• What is LEED's role in the future if green requirements are increasingly codified? Does LEED always impose higher requirements? Does it stick to a holistic approach and avoid "energy myopia" as coined by Shari Shapiro?
• If/when statutory framework for sustainable development emerges in earnest, will the position of pre-eminence of LEED erode? Is the USGBC's ultimate mission of "working to make green building available to everyone within a generation" furthered more by advancing legal codification or increasing the reach and depth of its current market penetration?

These are the Ghosts of LEED Present.  Next time we will discuss in greater detail the thicket of legal risk and defense issues posed by extended reporting requirements, decertification and recertification, including statutes of limitations and shared/murky issues of risk and responsibility.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (4)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link