Example Of Narrative Report

Although we appreciate your inclination to work with us and settle this matter, please be aware that my client is a small landscaping company that would be financially unable to pay your settlement offer of One Thousand United States Dollars (US$1,000.00). My client’s company mows lawns in western Massachusetts and since it is a seasonal company, only operates during specific

The Association was involved in a pending civil lawsuit venued in Hennepin County District Court, State of Minnesota, against Urban Homeworks, Inc. (“the Declarant) in Master Civil Construction Engineering, Master Property Management, LLC and Master Development Services, LLC, (“the General Contractor”). The declarant and general contractor sued 3rd party subcontractors Advanced Stucco and Stone, Inc. “Advanced Stucco”, All Seasons Chalking and Company, Inc. “All Seasons”, Tappe Construction, Inc. (“Tappe”), Stellar Contractors, Inc. (“Stellar”).

The Plaintiff is claiming $35 million from the State of NSW, which is purported to be vicariously liable for the Land and Environment Court and Pain J [1]. This claim includes nullifying Pain J’s judgment [14], and it is accompanied by Motions to uphold Lloyd J’s dismissal and refund the Plaintiff’s filing fees [2].

Identify any person not already named as a party to this lawsuit whom you contend caused or contributed to the occurrence complained of, including any architect, engineer, designer, contractor, subcontractor or others.

Weintraub Genshlea & Sproul, Rosemary Kelley, Charles L. Post, and William S. Jue, for Plaintiff Nosrat Khajavi.

• Contracts were exchanged on 2 May 2005 for the purchase of property for $2,130,000 between the plaintiffs and the first defendant.

One of the claims in this proceeding is the BEP Blue Gum Project which was formerly owned by Euan Pescott, brother to Roger Pescott. In 1999, Euan Pescott and BEP Management Pty Ltd entered into an agreement that requires BEP to establish and manage a eucalyptus plantation on the land provided by Euan Pescott. As a result, Euan Pescott had made a total payment of $ 1,076,253.46 to BEP throughout the years. In 2007, the directors of Environinvest decided to purchase the project by creating a document which is alleged to bear the false date of 1st July 1999. It acts as a false documentation of purchase, and with that Euan Pescott transferred the plantation to S.T.Y.A with the total amount

Tiller Construction Corporation entered into two contracts with Nadler, the CEO of Glenmar, where Tiller would do “the work” for Nadler at Westridge for $637,000 and the other for Tiller to do “the work” for Nadler at Cranberry for $688,800. Nadler agreed to be personally liable to Tiller for the payment of both contracts. When the job was done, Nadler refused to pay the remaining balance of $229,799.46 for the Cranberry project and a remaining balance of $264,273.85 for the Westridge project. So Tiller sued Nadler for the amount owed, plus interest, costs, and attorney’s fees.

The appellant, Parkview Queensland Pty Ltd (“Parkview”), is a building contractor who commenced construction of a residential property development under a standard form building contract with Fortia funds Management Ltd (“Fortia”), the developer. Fortia financed the construction under a loan facility with the Bank of Western Australia Ltd (“BankWest”).

Codelfa Construction (Plaintiff) had a contract with State Rail Authority NSW (Defendant) to excavate the tunnels for the railway in New South Wales. The contract agreed to complete the work in assured dates and finish it within 130 weeks, to finish work Codelfa were suppose to work three shifts a day and 7 days a week; initially Codelfa Construction was working accordingly. The work was to dig a tunnel so offcourse it was very noisy and caused some vibrations which were annoying to the surrounding residents which led to application quite a few application of nuisance and after a while Codelfa Construction had an injunction where they were forced to reduce the work hours by two shifts a day and not working on Sundays. The problem started here as the working hours were reduced so Codelfa Constructions was not able to finish the work in the set period of time which was given according to the contract therefore Codelfa Construction’s budget did exceed than mentioned in the contract and they needed more time to finish the work.

3.  Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities of defendants sued in this complaint as DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, and therefore sues these defendants by such fictitious

Interrogatory No. 6: Identify and describe in all possible detail the legal and factual basis for your

Avey is a lawyer with no experience in exterior home painting. (Doss Dep. 4). Due to a lack of experience, Avey hired an independent contractor

Kellerher Funeral Home, Inc. is claiming that a breach of contract has occurred in as much as the work completed by Gonzaga Construction was of sufficiently poor quality as to require rework that cost $4,700. Further, though Kellerher controlled the delays in construction due to his need to continue business operations, he is charging that the lost profit is due to construction delays brought about by Gonazaga's work on the site. The contract language did not stipulate how the interests of the going concern would be balanced against construction project schedule. Indeed, no date of completion was specified in the contract, and a two-week interim between the filing and the commencement of construction is a reasonable period of time for material procurement and arranging for labor. Moreover, the poor workmanship allegation was not communicated during the construction project, leaving Gonzaga with no opportunity to correct any problems with workmanship. For both parties to the contract, it is generally understood that a business contract agreement for services includes some intangibles, such as cooperation, quality of work, reliable communication, experience, and so forth. An essential element in a contract is consideration, which refers to a benefit to the promisor or a detriment to the promise. In other words, consideration is an exchange that is bargained for in the present in return for

On August 18, 2014 our company Green Wave Landscape Management were hired to service a Mr. Henry Stewart property. Mr. Stewart is a long time user our companies, landscaping services who have expressed the special needs of his property. We here Green Wave Landscape Management have acknowledged these need and have had no problems accommodating them thus far. Our perfect record has been damaged due to manager call that was made during that scheduling week. It has been brought to my attention that the same week we were scheduled