Category Archives: Delay

Federal Court Holds That, Under Louisiana Law, a Contractor Need Not Show a Total Work Stoppage to Recover Extended Home Office Overhead Under Eichleay

Posted on December 7, 2017 by

Team Contrs., L.L.C. v. Waypoint NOLA, L.L.C., No. 16-1131, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 162172 (E.D. La. Oct. 2, 2017). Waypoint NOLA (“Waypoint”) was the owner of a hotel construction project in New Orleans (the “Project”).  Waypoint contracted with Team Contractors … Continue reading →

Posted in Delay | Tagged , , , ,

Ohio Appeals Court Holds That Contractor Who Seeks Application of HOOP Formula to Calculate Home Office Overhead Need Not Prove The Conditions Precedent For Application of Eichleay Formula

Posted on July 13, 2017 by

Wood Elec., Inc. v. Ohio Facilities Constr. Comm’n, 10th Dist. Franklin No. 16AP-643, 2017-Ohio-2743, 2017 Ohio App. Lexis 1745 (May 9, 2017) The Ohio Facilities Construction Commission (“OFCC”), together with a school district, an architect, and a construction manager, issued … Continue reading →

Posted in Delay, Uncategorized | Tagged , , ,

Texas District Court Rejects Rail Contractor’s Delay and Prompt Payment Claims and Awards Owner More Than $3 Million

Posted on June 23, 2016 by

Balfour Beatty Rail, Inc. v. The Kansas City Southern Railway Company, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39086 (N.D. Tex., March 25, 2016) The contractor contracted with owner to install 65 miles of railroad track, for a price of $12,206,666.  The owner … Continue reading →

Posted in Breach of Contract, Delay, Differing Site Conditions, Extra Work, Payment dispute, Unjust Enrichment

Ohio Supreme Court Holds Reasonableness of Liquidated Damage Provision to Be Determined Based Upon the Parties’ Knowledge at Time of Contracting Rather than After Performance

Posted on May 9, 2016 by

Boone Coleman Constr., Inc. v. Vill. of Piketon, 2016-Ohio-628, 2016 Ohio LEXIS 441 (Ohio Feb. 24, 2016) A general contractor entered into a construction contract with a public agency for a road construction project with a $700 per day liquidated … Continue reading →

Posted in Delay, Liquidated Damage Provision

Washington State Court Affirms $155M Jury Award Against Contractor and Surety Stemming from Claim of Default Due to Delayed Performance, Sustaining Denial of Contractor’s Differing Site Condition Defense

Posted on November 30, 2015 by

Joseph T. Imperiale, Pepper Hamilton LLP, Partner James M. Kwartnik Jr., Pepper Hamilton LLP, Associate King County v. Vinci Construction Grands Projects/Parsons RCI/Frontier-Kemper, JV, 2015 Wash. App. LEXIS 2735 (Nov. 9, 2015) The Court of Appeals of Washington recently decided … Continue reading →

Posted in Delay, Differing Site Conditions, Liquidated Damage Provision