construction law question requires expert response. case #4

Case #4 Mega Manufacturer, Inc. (MMI) sought to build a new factory. MMI retained Awesome Architects, Inc. (AAI), an architectural firm, to create the plans and specifications. Based upon this design, MMI entered into a $2 million fixed-price contract with Prime Builder, Inc. Prime Builder hired several subcontractors, including a excavation subcontractor (Excavator) and a window installer (Window Wizard, Inc.). Under the design contract, AAI was to inspect the work to determine the contractor's entitlement to progress payments. The contract excluded AA's responsibility for the contractor's means and methods of performance. The project suffered from heavy rains. During one inspection, the AAI employee (a licensed architect) measured the amount of excavation work completed. He noticed the trench where Excavator's employees were working was water logged, but he said nothing. Shortly after he left, the trench caved in, injuring an Excavator employee. Late on a Friday, Window Wizard installed several windows with wooden frames. The employee forgot to caulk the windows. That weekend, a hurricane struck and the project was not resumed until the following week. When Window Wizard returned, it discovered the window frames had begun to rot. In addition, the drywall surrounding the windows were also molding. As a result (1) Prime Builder replaced the drywall and (2) Window Wizard replaced the windows. Question: Using all the content you have learned in the course this semester, please evaluate this scenario from a legal perspective. I will be looking for legal terms and jargon, case law justification and citation of source of your response. You need to include at minimum a detailed discussion on the most relevant aspects of insurance applicable to this case; insurance consequences; claims and project delivery