Pierce Atwood has handled thousands of matters in its 130-year history. If you know what you’re looking for, feel free to use the search field above. If you know the attorney or area of expertise most relevant to your needs, use the drop down menus. Or, if your search is not that specific at this point, select a practice area that is most relevant to your interests.
John Bulman is currently sitting on a Dispute Review Board for a nuclear power plant construction project. Industry professionals are chosen to sit on Dispute Review Boards by the interested parties involved with a construction project for their experience, their independence, their commitment to the project, and their training as mediators and arbitrators.
In a matter recognized by Rhode Island Lawyers Weekly as one of the most important opinions of 2012, we obtained a favorable order for a general contractor seeking to enforce an Ohio arbitration clause. The matter was of particular importance because it was the first time a court concluded that the Federal Arbitration Act preempted a Rhode Island statute that prohibits out-of-state arbitration in certain construction matters.
Obtained a favorable settlement for an owner of a spiritual retreat facility against its contractor and design professionals through a seven-party mediation following an incident that involved a burst sprinkler pipe, substantial property damage, and discovery of pervasive latent construction defects. Before the mediation, Pierce Atwood worked closely with the owner and the owner’s representatives to review the defective conditions and press for performance of the remedial work by the construction and design professionals. Multiple demands on the contractor’s performance bond had to be made to ensure performance of the corrective and incomplete work. Once the work was completed, Pierce Atwood represented the owner in the multi-party mediation that dealt with challenging issues involving construction defects with the fire protection system, reimbursement for additional costs due to the delayed project, complex insurance coverage issues (including with the owner’s property insurer), contract terms (waiver of subrogation, waiver of consequential damages), continuing warranty obligations, and the scope and finality of the release. At the end of the mediation process, the owner was paid for costs it incurred during the delayed project and it paid nothing against the claims submitted by its contractor and design professionals.
We represented a leading energy provider in mediation of approximately $150 million in related claims by two contractors arising out of a $1.55 billion transmission line construction project. The claims arose from an allegation that environmental compliance on the project was overly restrictive, leading to both delay and significantly increased costs of compliance. After two days of mediation per claim that included presentations by expert witnesses, we resolved the disputes for a fraction of the requested amount.
John Bulman mediated a dispute over an interstate highway construction project between a state department of transportation (DOT) and a regional heavy contractor.
John Bulman mediated a four-party property damage subrogation action currently pending in Massachusetts Federal Court.
John Bulman mediated a P3 (public-private partnership) dispute relating to a transportation infrastructure project in the Western U.S.
Served as chair of a panel addressing the termination of construction manager on a major biophysics research building. Beyond overseeing highly contentious proceedings, issued lengthy decision construing scope of section 4-61 of the Connecticut General Statutes, the Connecticut dispute resolution law pertaining to this public construction contract. Decision was subject to judicial review and was affirmed.
Represented one of three siblings in a dispute pertaining to care of mother with dementia and matters regarding handling of trust funds by one of the two brothers. We had the dispute stayed, pending mediation/arbitration, under which mediation occurred on the first day and when it failed, the matter immediately proceeded to arbitration before the same person who had been mediator. We received a total win for our client who was named solely responsible for the mother’s medical care, plus was given sole authority over the trusts. Brother was also ordered to reimburse the trusts for payments improperly made to himself and his wife while he managed finances.
Pierce Atwood delivered a successful outcome to the regional sewer authority Narragansett Bay Commission (NBC) at an American Arbitration Association (AAA) construction arbitration relating to a claim that a differing site condition impacted the installation of a concrete drop shaft. The 30-foot diameter drop shaft was 220 feet deep and connected to the NBC’s one-mile long retention tunnel designed to capture sewerage that historically flowed into Narragansett Bay during rain storms. During the contractor’s grouting operations at an adjacent structure, the contractor’s drop shaft experienced a large amount of water intrusion (up to 250 gallons per minute). The contractor spent $1.1 million to pump out the water and seal the concrete walls of its drop shaft. Pierce Atwood attorneys John Bulman and Katie Kohm handled the defense and the hearings before the panel of three AAA arbitrators. The arbitrators gave credence to Pierce Atwood’s main arguments, found that the contractor failed to carry its burden of proof, and dismissed the contractor’s claim in its entirety.
In a large public works project, we represented a joint venture road/bridge builder in mediation with a state DOT (and Federal Highway) in which DOT threatened to impose millions of dollars of liquidated damages. The matter was successfully settled over several days of mediation.
In 2016, Pierce Atwood partner John Bulman successfully mediated a six-party case pending in federal court. The matter involved a dispute between a publicly traded company and former board members and officers. The allegations included claims of breach of fiduciary duty, gender discrimination, theft of intellectual property and whistleblower claims. Three insurance policies were in play and after two days of mediation and some follow up, the matter settled.