No specific laws identified for this ruling.
Construction company partially won on cost-plus contract claims but lost on stipulated sum contract. Appellate court reversed certain rulings regarding supplier payment credits, prejudgment interest start date, and notice-to-cure requirements.
This is an action by a construction company to recover on a written stipulated sum contract and an oral cost-plus contract for the construction of a commercial building. The construction company sought to recover for additional work performed that was not included in the scope of the stipulated sum contract and the remaining balance of the cost-plus contract. The building owners contended that the construction company was not entitled to additional payment under the written agreement and counterclaimed for payments the owners made directly to suppliers for work included in the scope of the stipulated sum contract, and for reimbursement of funds expended to correct a defect caused by the construction company. The trial court held that neither the construction company nor the owners were entitled to recover under the stipulated sum contract that the owners were not entitled to reimbursement because they failed to establish that the construction company caused the defect or, in the alternative, failed to provide a reasonable opportunity to cure and that the construction company was entitled to judgment for work performed in connection with the cost-plus agreement. We reverse the court's determination that the owners were not entitled to a credit for certain payments made directly to suppliers, that prejudgment interest commenced on November 10, 2014, when the notice of completion was filed, and that the owners did not provide the construction company with notice and an opportunity to cure. We affirm the trial court's holding in all other respects.
This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.
Universities and colleges—Civil rights—Graduate student's formal complaint of sexual harassment against tenured professor—Employment contract provides procedures \for dismissal or removal from tenure\—Removal procedures not followed and contract breached, when.
Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.
This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.