Engineer Not Liable for Breach of Implied Warranty of Design

When an engineer designed a road that failed because the impermeability of the underlying soil caused water to accumulate between the soil and the asphalt, resulting in the road floating and the asphalt cracking, the project owner sued  for negligence and breach of...

Risk of Differing Site Condition Not Shifted to Contractor

Contract provisions requiring contractors to perform site investigation and inspection prior to bidding did not impose the risk of subsurface conditions on the contractor, and therefore, did not preclude a claim for equitable adjustment.  When the contractor began...

Differing Site Conditions: Can You Recover Increased Costs?

In some parts of the country, subsurface conditions create great financial risks for contractors.  The Differing Site Conditions clause is one of the tools owners use to remove some of the risk and, therefore, maintain competition in the bidding process. Generally, a...

Contractor sues engineer for misrepresenting site conditions

Where a general contractor prepared its bid in reliance upon information provided by the project owner’s engineer, and the site conditions differed from what was represented, the contractor sued the engineer for misrepresenting the conditions. Both the...

Contractor Entitled to Recover Additional Compensation Due to Project Owner’s Failure to Disclose Material Information During Bidding Process – even Where Nondisclosure was not Done with Affirmative Intent to Conceal the Information

Contractor is entitled to recover additional compensation due to a school district’s failure to disclose material information during the bidding process, and it is not necessary for the contractor to prove affirmative fraudulent intent to conceal the information. ...