The Lawyers Weekly - July 1, 2011

Contractor
Continued From Page 13

for what portions of the work
each would be responsible.”
“You want to be clear on what
project development method
you are using. That was not
done here,” said Annibale.

The defendants put forward
two primary arguments. First,
that the plaintiff was a general
contractor who promised them
a finished project, which he
failed to deliver. Second, that if
he was not a general contractor,
then the work that was com-
pleted was so deficient that
other problems arose that had
to be corrected at significant
cost. The plaintiff contended
that he worked under the direc-
tion of one of the defendants
and did not take on the role of
general contractor. Rather, he
completed tasks as instructed.

Reasons: S.E.R. Contracting Ltd. v. Hodder, [2011] N.J. No. 132.

EscapE your outdatEd and inEfficiEnt softwarE

Join the many firms who are switching to RealtiWeb®, the advanced web-based real estate transaction platform. Your transition will be as seamless as possible with our expert support staff and migration specialists.