Meredith E. Dishaw
Meredith Dishaw is a Member in the Seattle office of Williams Kastner and the Co-Chair of the Construction and Surety Practice Teams. Ms. Dishaw is a construction and surety litigator who represents clients in state and federal courts as well as private arbitrations throughout the country. Her clients include public and private owners, contractors, sureties, architects and engineers and she works with them in all phases of the construction and bonding process from contract drafting and review to negotiation, trial and appeals. Ms. Dishaw’s diverse background includes resolution of complex payment and performance bond claims, commercial and license disputes, and subrogation and recovery issues. Ms. Dishaw prosecutes affirmative construction claims to mitigate surety losses and defends extra-contractual claims including claims brought under the Washington Insurance Fair Conduct Act. Ms. Dishaw regularly writes and speaks on the topics of surety and insurance coverage.
- Williams Kastner, Member | 2018 – Present
- Williams Kastner, Associate | 2014 – 2018
- Cozen O’Connor, Associate | 2010 – 2014
Presentations & Seminars
- Panel Presenter, “Extra-Contractual Claims and How to Avoid Them,” The Pearlman Conference, Seattle, WA September 2018.
- Presenter, “The Nuts and Bolts of Surety Law,” Advanced Construction Law CLE, Oregon State Bar Association, Portland, Oregon, October 2017.
- Panel Presenter, “Implied Warranty of the Plans and Specifications under Spearin,” The Pearlman Conference, Seattle, WA September 2017.
Articles & Publications
- Co-Author, Chapter 9: Extra-Contractual Liability of Performance Bond Sureties in The Law of Performance Bonds, ABA, Tort Trial & Insurance Practice (3d. Ed. 2019).
- Co-Author, “Extra-Contractual Claims and How to Avoid Them,” The Pearlman Conference, September 2018.
- “The Nuts and Bolts of Surety Law,” Advanced Construction Law CLE, Oregon State Bar Association, October 2017.
- Co-Author, “Implied Warranty of the Plans and Specifications under Spearin,” The Pearlman Conference, September 2017.
- “Washington Supreme Court Limits the Scope of the Insurance Fair Conduct Act,” Williams Kastner Northwest Insurance Law Quarterly Newsletter, Spring 2017.
- “Washington Supreme Court Limits the Scope of the Insurance Fair Conduct Act,” Williams Kastner Surety Law Update, Spring 2017.
- “Alaska Court Refuses To Narrowly Define ‘Contractor’ In Policy Exclusion,” Williams Kastner Northwest Insurance Law Quarterly Newsletter, Fall 2016.
- Represented general contractor under a design-build contract in litigation relating various third-party damage claims. The third-party claims were resolved favorably through settlement on behalf of our client;
- Represented sureties during their investigations into payment, performance, supply, and other bond claims to assist in the legal aspect of any claim determination;
- Represent surety clients in their investigation, determination, and litigation relating to bonds issued as required by the state for licensed and registered contractors;
- Represented a surety client in state court litigation alleging bad faith against the surety for its performance bond investigation, which ultimately resulted in a very favorable settlement on behalf of the surety;
- After a successful arbitration on behalf of a principal and a surety client, Ms. Dishaw represented the surety in its successful recovery of all of its incurred fees, costs, and expenses under the indemnity agreement with the principal;
- Dishaw participated in a matter in which Williams Kastner defeated a supply bond claimant’s bad faith and extra-contractual claims on summary judgment. It is believed that this the largest extra-contractual claim ever asserted against a surety in the State of Washington. Despite the claimant’s allegations that the surety had acted in bad faith and had violated the Insurance Fair Conduct Act by failing to perform an adequate investigation and denying the claim, the trial court granted the motion for summary judgment finding that a genuine dispute as to liability justified the surety’s denial of the claim. This is a notable outcome given an apparent growing trend in Washington to assert extra-contractual claims against sureties.