In re Mississippi Valley Livestock, Inc., 745 F.3d 299 (7th Cir. 2014) –

A debtor sold cattle for the account of a cattle producer and then remitted the proceeds to the producer.  A chapter 7 trustee sought to recover the payments as preferential transfers.  The trustee lost in both the bankruptcy and district courts, and then appealed to the 7th Circuit.

New Bern Riverfront Dev., LLC v Weaver Cooke Constr., LLC (In re New Bern Riverfront Dev. LLC), 521 B.R. 718 (Bankr. E.D.N.C. 2014) 

The debtor made claims against a surety that issued a performance bond in connection with a construction contract.  The surety contended that it was not liable for the consequential damage claims.

Waldschmidt v. Singletary Construction LLC (In re Tackett), 516 B.R. 498 (Bankr. M.D. Tenn. 2014) –

A bankruptcy trustee sought turnover of profits from the sale of homes constructed by a contractor.  The trustee contended that there were contracts between the debtor and the contractor pursuant to which the debtor agreed to reimburse the contractor for its costs plus pay a $15,000 contractor’s fee for each home.

Branch Banking & Trust Co. v Construction Supervision Services, Inc. (In re Construction Supervision Services, Inc.), 753 F.3d 124 (4th Cir. 2014) –

Reshetar Systems, Inc. v. Thompson, 686 F.3d 940 (8th Cir. 2012) –

Lain v. V3 Construction Group Ltd. (In re Erickson Retirement Communities, LLC), 475 B.R. 762 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2012) –

The trustee of a liquidating trust under a general contractor’s confirmed chapter 11 plan tried to recover pre-petition payments made to a subcontractor as either a preference or a fraudulent conveyance.  The court’s decision turned on whether the payments were trust funds under the Illinois Mechanics Lien Act.

Johnson Memorial Hospital, Inc. v. New England Radiator Works (In re Johnson Memorial Hospital, Inc.), 470 B.R. 119 (Bankr. D. Conn. 2012) –

GII Industries, Inc. v. New York Dep’t of Transp. 2011 Bankr. LEXIS 3663 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. Sept. 30, 2011)  

The Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of New York considered the appropriate method for calculating a contractor’s inefficiency damages and whether the contractor was entitled to prejudgment interest in connection with a highway reconstruction project. The Court held that the total cost method was the appropriate manner by which to calculate damages and that the contractor was entitled to prejudgment interest running from the date final payment was due.

WTE-S&S AG Enters., LLC v. GHD, Inc., 2017 Bankr. LEXIS 2343 (Bankr. N. D. Ill. August 18, 2017)

In a decision released on March 11, 2020, the Ontario Court of Appeal provided reassurance for those in the construction industry of the effectiveness of section 9(1) of the Construction Act, RSO c C.30 (“CA”) in insolvency proceedings. This decision did not overturn the previous decision rendered in Re Veltri Metal Products Co (2005), 48 CLR (3d) 161 (Ont CA) (“Veltri”); rather, the Court of Appeal distinguished the two cases on the facts.