Imagine reading a crime novel and just when you think you figured out whodunit, a plot twist suggests a different culprit. Previously, I’ve written about making sure the answer you think is right is, in fact, the right answer. In construction contracting, finding the right answer can be a difficult task when there are several separate contract provisions, specifications, and other documents incorporated into the parties’ agreement by reference.
Recently, a Contractor provided construction management services for NAVFAC at U.S. Naval Base Kitsap in Washington State. At bid time, the Contractor understood all the many parts of the solicitation allowed the roles of Superintendent and Safety Officer to be fulfilled by the same person. Post-award, NAVFAC demanded the two positions be fulfilled by two different people.
The U.S. Court of Federal Claims agreed with the Contractor. The Court interpreted together all the various references to Superintendent and Safety Officer in the parties’ agreement – a tedious task. Even the well-written Court’s opinion (like a good crime novel) seemed to suggest an answer until a new fact was introduced from a separate part of the parties’ agreement (like a plot twist). You don’t know whodunit until the end.
FEDERAL CONTRACT TERMINATION OR MODIFICATION
The White House has directed Agency heads to “terminate or modify . . . covered contracts.” With some exceptions, there are […]
Roads & Bridges | Maximizing Damage Recovery
MAXIMIZING DAMAGE RECOVERY
Tracking Costs, Avoiding Duplication in Liquidated and Actual Damage Claims
A County and Contractor contracted for construction of a road and […]
Roads & Bridges | Roadwork, Delays and Disputes
ROADWORK, DELAYS, AND DISPUTES
The Subcontract Case In Pecos County, Texas
“Road construction is ubiquitous in our society. . . .” C&C Road […]
Roads & Bridges | Understanding Sovereign Immunity
UNDERSTANDING SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY| Public Contracts and Lessons from Recent Texas Cases
Generally, governmental entities are immune from lawsuits. One exception is contractual. If […]
Roads & Bridges | Indiana Court Upholds Broad ND4D Clause
INDIANA COURT UPHOLDS BROAD ND4D CLAUSE | Ruling Precludes Subcontractor Claims for Delay and Acceleration Damages
This is the story of an Indiana […]
Roads & Bridges | Some Conditions Apply
SOME CONDITIONS APPLY | The scope of insurance policy coverage and what the terms dictate
At some time or another, many have tried […]
Roads & Bridges | Contract Termination
CONTRACT TERMINATION | An unpredictable case teaches hard lessons to each party involved
Court decisions are “opinions.” There are majority and dissenting (disagreeing) […]
Roads & Bridges | Good Faith and Fair Dealing
GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING | How Do You Prove a Party Has Failed to Act Based Upon an Ulterior Motive?
The duty […]
Roads & Bridges | Not Another Notice Story
NOT ANOTHER NOTICE STORY| This Defensive Argument Seems to be on the Rise
AS I CONSIDERED the subject matter for this column, I […]
