0 Does the Spearin Doctrine apply in a design-build setting? United States for the Use and Benefit of Bonita Pipeline, Inc. v. Balfour Beatty Construction, LLC. United States District Court, Southern District of California. (2017), by Hugh Anderson

Summary: Balfour Beatty was the design-builder for a Naval Facilities hangar replacement project at Camp Pendleton, California. Balfour Beatty subcontracted a portion of the work, also on a design-build basis, to Bonita Pipeline. Balfour Beatty provided design documents, prepared for Balfour by engineering firms, to Bonita. These design documents were expressly characterized as incomplete, and […]

0 Enforceability of clause stating that engineer has no duty to contractor. Domson, Inc. v. Kadrmas Lee and Jackson, Inc. Supreme Court of South Dakota (2018), by Hugh Anderson

Summary: This case is focused on an EJCDC construction contract clause, currently set forth as Paragraph 10.07.A of EJCDC C-700 (2018). This clause was included in the road construction contract between the project owner, the Oglala Sioux Tribe, and Domson, Inc. Dakota Engineering and Kadrmas, Lee and Jackson (KLJ) were the design engineers, and KLJ […]

Monthly Archives: March 2019

0 Does the Spearin Doctrine apply in a design-build setting? United States for the Use and Benefit of Bonita Pipeline, Inc. v. Balfour Beatty Construction, LLC. United States District Court, Southern District of California. (2017), by Hugh Anderson

0 Enforceability of clause stating that engineer has no duty to contractor. Domson, Inc. v. Kadrmas Lee and Jackson, Inc. Supreme Court of South Dakota (2018), by Hugh Anderson