February 2016 - EJCDC - Engineers Joint Contract Documents Committee

0 Ability of contractor to bring suit involving differing site conditions directly against geotechnical engineering firm, by Hugh Anderson

Issue: Ability of contractor to bring suit involving differing site conditions directly against geotechnical engineering firm. Apex Directional Drilling, LLC, v. SHN Consulting Engineers & Geologists, Inc. U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (2015). Summary: Wastewater pipeline project for the City of Eureka, California, using horizontal directional drilling. SHN was the city’s […]

0 Did the services of an engineer constitute an improvement to property, and thus entitle engineer to a construction (mechanic’s) lien? by Hugh Anderson

Issue: Did the services of an engineer constitute an improvement to property, and thus entitle engineer to a construction (mechanic’s) lien? Christopher B. Burke Engineering, Ltd., v. Heritage Bank of Central Illinois. Supreme Court of Illinois (2015). Summary: Burke Engineering was retained by a prospective developer to survey a tract of land, prepare and record […]

0 Issue: Compliance with procedural requirements of performance bond, by Hugh Anderson

Issue: Compliance with procedural requirements of performance bond. Curtiss-‐ Manes-‐Schulte, Inc. v. Safeco Insurance Company of America. U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri (2015). Summary: Curtiss-‐Manes-‐Schulte (CMS) was the general contractor on a building project. It subcontracted HVAC work to Balkenbush Mechanical, and required Balkenbush to furnish a subcontract performance bond. Balkenbush […]

0 Contractor’s Differing Site Condition claim on project with a Geotechnical Baseline Report, by Hugh Anderson

Issue: Contractor’s Differing Site Condition claim on project with a Geotechnical Baseline Report. King County v. Vinci Construction Grands Projets. Court of Appeals of Washington (2015). Summary: $200 million project that included 13 miles of tunnels for wastewater conveyance. Contract included a Geotechnical Data Report (GDR) and a Geotechnical Baseline Report (GBR). The contractor, a […]

0 Bid responsiveness; correction of bid deficiency, by Hugh Anderson

Issue: Bid responsiveness; correction of bid deficiency. DeSilva Gates Construction v. Department of Transportation. Court of Appeal of California (2015). Summary: $34 million state highway contract. Under a California public bidding law that attempts to discourage bid shopping, bidders were required to submit a Subcontractor List naming subs that would provide more than 0.5% of […]

0 Engineer’s liability for failure of rain tank that it designed; reliance on manufacturer’s information; standard of care, and contractor’s responsibility, by Hugh Anderson

Issue: Engineer’s liability for failure of rain tank that it designed, including issues of reliance on manufacturer’s information regarding the tank, standard of care, and contractor’s responsibility. William H. Gordon Associates, Inc., v. Heritage Fellowship Church. Supreme Court of Virginia (2016). Summary: Heritage Fellowship Church retained Gordon to conduct various civil engineering tasks associated with […]

0 Viability of supplier’s claim against design engineer, by Hugh Anderson

Issue: Viability of supplier’s claim against design engineer. State Ready Mix, Inc., v. Moffatt & Nichol. Court of Appeals of California (2015). Summary: Bellingham Marine, as “project manager,” (in reality a design-‐builder) hired Moffatt & Nichol, an engineering firm, to design a travel lift pier at the Channel Islands Harbor. Bellingham contracted with Major Engineering […]

0 Official immunity of engineering firm functioning as city engineer, by Hugh Anderson

Issue: Official immunity of engineering firm functioning as city engineer. Kariniemi v. City of Rockford. Court of Appeals of Minnesota (2015). Summary: The City of Rockford, Minnesota, retained a private engineering firm, Bonestroo, to act as city engineer. One task was to design storm sewers, retention ponds, and street grading for a new residential development. […]

0 Interpretation of “substantial completion” with respect to a statute of repose, by Hugh Anderson

Issue: Interpretation of “substantial completion” with respect to a statute of repose. Horning v. Penrose Plumbing & Heating, Inc. Supreme Court of Wyoming (2014). Summary: Mr. and Mrs. Horning awoke confused and disoriented one January morning. Their condominium unit was extremely cold. Investigation revealed a rupture in the furnace exhaust pipe. The couple had sustained severe […]

0 Enforceability of limitation and waiver of liability clauses in a teaming agreement, after parties have entered into a subcontract, by Hugh Anderson

Issue: Enforceability of limitation and waiver of liability clauses in a teaming agreement, after parties have entered into a subcontract. URS Corp. v. Transpo Group, Inc. United States District Court for the Western District of Washington (2015). Summary: On a design-‐build highway project, the design-‐builder, Flatiron, withheld payment from the lead design firm, URS, asserting […]

1 2 Next »

Monthly Archives: February 2016