Archive for the ‘Lehi Attorneys’ Category

By: Brian Haws

Image via Wikipedia

After more than a year of construction stretching from Spanish Fork to Lehi, it’s easy to understand the frustration that many drivers feel in trying to navigate the I-15 corridor construction project.  However, there is a very good reason that the speed limit in this stretch of highway has been reduced to 55 mph.  According to a US Department of Labor report, 277 highway workers were killed in 2010 when they were struck by vehicles while working in construction zones.  This is a six percent increase from the number of those killed in 2009.  The number of those injured, but not killed, in such accidents is many times higher.  The saddest part of this tragic story is that the vast majority of these accidents could have been avoided if drivers would’ve simply obeyed the speed limit and slowed down.

These hard-working men and women are vulnerable and exposed as they work to provide us, the traveling public, a better transportation system that will alleviate the delays and frustration of rush-hour traffic jams.  They deserve our gratitude, our attention, and our patience.  However, if such considerations do not motivate us to give road workers a break by slowing down and being more careful, the Utah Traffic Code, and the potential impact to our wallets, should give us pause as we travel in these construction zones.  Section 41–6a–209(a) of the Utah Code provides that fines for speeding double when the violation occurs in a construction zone.  That is a $140 fine for going as little as 5 mph over the speed limit.  Now it is true that workers have to be present in the construction zone for the fine to be increased, but it is important to understand that workers do not need to be visible in the location where you were driving in order to be considered present in the work zone.  They can be working anywhere along the construction zone, which in this case stretches many miles through several different cities.

Furthermore, when workers are present and are only separated by the orange barrels, the simple act of driving at 75 or 80 mph, a speed which many might consider to be normal highway speeds, could be considered wanton and willful disregard for the safety of those workers and as such could result in a reckless driving charge that would bring in a fine of at least $580 and a potential suspension of the drivers driving privileges.

Some may complain that these higher fines are simply an excuse for another revenue stream as the government tries to pull more money out of our pockets, but simply looking at the number of lives that are lost, and loved ones who are left behind to pick up the pieces, just because someone was speeding in these areas should quickly quiet any such argument.  The true design of this code section is to motivate us to slow down, be patient, and to watch out for those who are working to make our roads and highways better.  While the consequences of being pulled over for speeding in a construction zone maybe significant, they are nothing compared to the consequences, both financially and emotionally, of being involved in an accident that injures or kills a construction worker.

“Give Road Workers a Break” is not just a clever slogan, its the law and it is enforced vigorously.  More important , its the right thing to do, both for the workers and for your wallet.

Provo attorneys

_{»crosslinked«}

by Laramie D. Merritt

Image via Wikipedia

On October 27, 2011, the Utah Court of Appeals issued its opinion in All Clean Inc. dba The Flood, Co. v. Timberline Properties, et al.  The circumstances under which that case arose were that Timberline Properties hired All Clean, Inc., to “conduct ‘[m]itigation work to preserve, protect, [and] secure the property . . . from further damage.’  The scope of the work included extracting the water, padding the furniture to prevent additional damage, drying the premises, cleaning and deodorizing the carpets, and applying a microbial agent to prevent mold.  The mitigation did not involve any structural work or the removal or installation of any carpeting.”¹  After All Clean, Inc., provided the flood mitigation services, it received what it deemed to be only partial payment for the services rendered.  When a bill for the remainder went unpaid, All Clean filed a lien in the Weber County Recorder’s Office.

Five months later, All Clean filed a complaint in district court, asserting causes of action for breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, unjust enrichment, and foreclosure of the mechanics’ lien. All Clean also sought attorney fees under both the contract and the mechanics’ lien statute. Following a bench trial, the trial court rejected All Clean’s claims except for unjust enrichment, on which it awarded All Clean $1519.07, the difference between what Timberline had paid and what Travelers had agreed to pay. The court rejected All Clean’s mechanics’ lien claim, stating, “This is not a mechanic[s’] lien case because the work done by [All Clean] is not of the type which entitles [All Clean] to have a lien upon the property of [Timberline].” Consequently, it denied All Clean’s request for attorney fees under the mechanics’ lien statute.²

In response to an appeal by All Clean of the denial of its mechanic’s lien claims, the Utah Court of Appeals held that “[b]ecause All Clean’s flood mitigation work in Timberline’s building was not an ‘improvement of any building or structure or an improvement to any premises,’ see Utah Code Ann. § 38-1-3 (current version at id. (Supp. 2011)), so as to fall within the scope of the mechanics’ lien statute, we affirm the trial court’s decision that the statute did not apply here and that All Clean was therefore not entitled to the benefit of the statute’s attorney fees provision.”³

The clear lesson for contractors providing flood or fire restoration services, or other cleaning services, that do not involve new construction or the installation of building materials in a permanent fashion is to get paid up front, because if they only clean, they will likely not be entitled to a mechanic’s lien (or to the attorney fees normally available when a lien is successfully filed and foreclosed) if full payment is not forthcoming.