Perspective
Oct. 19, 2012
Policies clash when it comes to subdivision improvement bonds
There is no guidance reconciling competing policies -- that taxpayers should not be burdened by the installation of public improvements versus disfavoring stale claims. By Joan Stevens Smyth of Kaufman Dolowich Voluck & Gonzo LLP
With competing public policies and no clear appellate guidance, insurers and municipalities are examining the questions of what is the statute of limitations and when does it commence running when the public agency seeks to enforce the terms of a subdivision improvement bond, particularly in instances when the original subdivision developer is long gone and the public improvements remain uninstalled. With an anemic economy and the difficult...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In