Construction Claims Monthly - Devoted exclusively to the problems of construction contracting since 1963

Updates from Current Issue
WHO’S TO BLAME: CONTRACTOR LIABILITY WHERE THE FACT FINDER CAN’T APPORTION FAULTLEAD CONTAMINATION IS A TYPE II DIFFERING CONDITION, GOVT. TO FOOT DISPOSAL BILLSUB’S $1.2 MILLION EXTRA WORK CLAIM COULDN’T CLEAR WRITTEN CONSENT HURDLECONTRACTOR HAD DUTY TO DISCLOSE NEGOTIATIONS THAT OUSTED SUB FROM PROJECTPARTIES’ CONTRACT DID NOT CONTAIN A FORUM-SELECTION CLAUSEFEDERAL GOVT. WAS JUST A ‘NOMINAL’ PARTY TO SUB’S MILLER ACT SUITBIDDER’S DESIGN PROPOSAL DEMONSTRATED ‘SOME RISK OF FAILURE’
 

Contractor Couldn't Make Fraud Allegation Stick Where It Failed To Track Sub's Performance

Wednesday, December 30, 2009 03:48 am

 

Misrepresentation  â€” Miller Act

Empire Enterprises JKB, Inc. v. Union City Contractors, Inc.

U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York

2009 U.S. Dist. Lexis 88839 (September 25, 2009)

A general contractor claimed a subcontractor fraudulently overstated its work but had no tallies of its own to dispute the sub's meticulous records. Empire Enterprises JKB, Inc. (Empire) performed tree debris removal on a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) project to clean up the Mount Morris Dam in Livingston County, New York. Empire claimed it was not paid for the total amount of floating debris it removed from the site and sought payment for the alleged balance due  â€” $85,000. The general contractor, Union City Contractors, Inc. (Union City), contended that Empire knowingly inflated the quantity of debris.

Union City's contract with Empire did not include a maximum cubic yardage of material (the minimum was 2,500 cubic yards), and the contractor never disputed the amount of the invoices Empire submitted or the quantity of debris they billed for. Nevertheless, in court, Union City contended that the total amount Empire claimed to have removed  â€” 11,470 cubic yards  â€” differed too substantially from historical quantities of debris at the site to be accurate.

That argument failed since sufficient evidence at[...]

Sign up now for Construction Claims Monthly Online! Your own virtual help desk of must-have techniques, tutorials, and how-to articles.
 
Join Now Construction Claims Monthly! Close