The Construction Counselor

On November 22, 2024, the Iowa Supreme Court entered an order on a matter arising from a general contractor’s motion demanding that a public owner release retainage on a construction project prior to final completion of the project, with the Supreme Court denying that contractor’s motion and allowing the public owner to continue withhold retainage.

On October 10, 2024, the Iowa Supreme Court heard oral argument in Charles L. Smith, Trustee in the Bankruptcy of Metro Concrete, Inc. v. Des Moines Area Community College and Rochon Corporation of Iowa, Inc. n/k/a Graphite Construction Group, Inc., a case involving retainage rights by owners on public projects. 

This is the fourth post in a series that explores the reasoning and practical impact of the recent federal court decision that blocked certain provisions in the DOL's new DBA rule. In this post, I discuss the DOL’s attempt to impose DBA requirements through operation of law, the reasoning behind the court’s decision to block that effort, and what the court decision means for contractors and subcontractors today.

This is the third post in a series that explores the reasoning and practical impact of the recent federal court decision that blocked certain provisions in the DOL's new DBA rule. In this post, I discuss the DOL’s attempt to significantly narrow the material supplier exemption, the reasoning behind the court’s decision to block that effort, and what the court decision means for contractors and subcontractors today.

This is the second post in a series that explores the reasoning and practical impact of the recent federal court decision that blocked certain provisions in the DOL's new DBA rule. In this post, I discuss the DOL’s attempt to extend DBA to delivery truck drivers, the reasoning behind the court’s decision to block that effort, and what the court decision means for contractors and subcontractors today.

Last fall, I wrote a three-part series discussing how the DOL's 2023 overhaul of DBA regulations significantly expanded DBA coverage. In June, a federal judge temporarily blocked implementation of three provisions of the new regulations while the court considers a legal challenge to the regulations. This post explores the reasoning and practical impact of the court decision, including five key things to understand about the recent decision.

When homeowners discover defective construction, it can be difficult to understand and remedy the issues. It can be even more difficult to determine which parties are responsible. The Iowa Court of Appeals recently offered some clarity in Yakel v. Wheeler.

This month, Governor Kim Reynolds signed into law two more laws affecting the construction industries: House File 2581, which makes changes in the notice period and other aspects of the law regarding location of underground utilities; and HF 2388, relating to the regulation of exterior cladding and finish materials used on residential buildings.

As those in the construction industry know, Iowa Code Chapter 573 governs public projects in Iowa in many aspects, including setting forth the rights and obligations of those involved in public projects in regard to retainage. From time to time, there are disputes in the interplay between the various provisions of this chapter and questions about the balancing of the rights among the various players in the project—the project owner, the general/principal contractor and the subcontractors.

On Wednesday, April 10, 2024, Governor Kim Reynolds approved Senate File 455. This new law limits the ability of cities and counties to regulate topsoil and stormwater on construction sites.