Contractor’s Third Party Beneficiary Claim Dismissed Against Designer Where Designer’s Contract with Owner Lacked Clear Intent to Benefit the Contractor

Arco Ingenierosm, S.A. v. CDM Int’l Inc., Civil Action No. 18-12348-PBS, 2019 BL 100779 (D. Mass. Mar. 22, 2019)

eatonl_thumb
Luke Nicholas Eaton

In November 2009, Tropical Storm Ida hit El Salvador, causing flooding, landslides, and the destruction of homes, roads, bridges, schools, health clinics, and other infrastructure.  The United States Agency for International Development (“USAID”) provided $25 million in funding to rebuild damaged infrastructure.  USAID retained Defendant CDM International Inc. (“CDM”) to conduct studies and assessment for the construction of eight schools and one health clinic (the “Projects”) and to create preliminary designs and technical specifications for these Projects.  These preliminary designs were intended to constitute at least thirty percent of final designs for the Projects.  Relying on the preliminary designs created by CDM, Plaintiff Arco Ingenieros, S.A. de C.V. (“ARCO”) submitted bids to act as the design-build contractor for the Projects.  USAID awarded the Projects to ARCO.

Continue reading “Contractor’s Third Party Beneficiary Claim Dismissed Against Designer Where Designer’s Contract with Owner Lacked Clear Intent to Benefit the Contractor”

Utah Federal Court Dismisses Claim for Attorney Fees Finding That Neither the Indemnification Provision nor the Failure-To-Perform Provision Applies to a Lawsuit Between Contractor and Subcontractor

R&O Constr. Co. v. MBA Gen. Contracting, LLC, No. 1:18-cv-00042, 2019 BL 98680 (D. Utah Mar. 21, 2019)
cuozzom_thumb
Michelle J. Cuozzo

On March 21, 2019, a Utah federal court granted Defendants MBA General Contracting, LLC and Cory Martin’s motion to dismiss R&O Construction Company’s claim for attorney fees.

R&O, as general contractor of a construction project, entered into two subcontracts with MBA to perform concrete work.  The first subcontract, entitled Master Subcontract Agreement, outlined general obligations between the parties.  The second, entitled Work Authorization Document, outlined more specific obligations.  R&O asserted various causes of action against MBA arising from MBA’s alleged breach of the subcontracts, including a claim for attorney fees.  MBA moved to dismiss the attorney fees claim, arguing that neither subcontract provides for such an award.

Continue reading “Utah Federal Court Dismisses Claim for Attorney Fees Finding That Neither the Indemnification Provision nor the Failure-To-Perform Provision Applies to a Lawsuit Between Contractor and Subcontractor”