Topic
Differing Site Conditions
44 published works
The Federal Government Contracts & Procurement Blog
REA and Claim Best Practices: Providing Notice of Differing Site Conditions
Recently on the blog, I covered one of the major risks encountered by construction contractors – subsurface or unexpected physical conditions discovered after the work begins (commonly known as Differing…
Constructlaw®
Evidence That Government Internally Considered Additional Modifications After the Parties Had Signed Earlier Modifications May Negate a Finding That the Earlier Modifications Were an Accord and Satisfaction of All Claims
By John Conrad
Meridian Eng’g Co. v. United States, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 7024 (Fed. Cir., Mar. 20, 2018) Meridian Engineering Company (“Meridian”) was hired by the United States (“Government”) to construct flood control structures…
Texas Construction Law Blog
When is an Unforeseen Condition a “Differing Site Condition”?
I was reviewing various articles I have written over the years and came across a prior version of this one about differing site conditions, written nearly twenty years ago. I…
The Federal Government Contracts & Procurement Blog
Government Contracting 101: Differing Site Conditions
One of the primary risks facing construction contractors is subsurface or unexpected physical conditions discovered after the work begins (commonly known as a Differing Site Condition). When such conditions are…
The Federal Government Contracts & Procurement Blog
Contractor Tips: Differing Site Conditions Claims – Focus on Actual Costs Incurred
Today, we have a question for our federal construction readers -- If your project is operating within an anticipated budget, are you still entitled to the additional costs associated with…
Ahead of Schedule
Court of Appeals affirms Brightwater judgment, reviews law regarding differing site conditions and surety obligations
By Bart Reed
On November 9, 2015, Division One of the Court of Appeals affirmed a 2012 King County trial court judgment that joint-venture tunneling contractor Vinci Construction Grands Projets/Parsons RCI/Frontier-Kemper (VPFK) was…
Constructlaw®
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
By James M. Kwartnik Jr., Joseph T. Imperiale
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 King County v. Vinci Construction…
Constructlaw®
Federal Circuit Court Affirms that Federal Claims Court Lacks Jurisdiction Over Claims By Subcontractor
Montano Elec. Contractor v. United States, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 5928 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 13, 2015) The Army Corps of Engineers (“the Corps”) hired a general contractor, who subcontracted certain…
Constructlaw®
Federal Circuit Court Clarifies Standard for Establishing Government’s Breach of the Implied Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing in Addressing Claim for Differing Site Conditions
By Bob Gallagher, Jeffery R. Mullen
Metcalf Constr. Co. v. United States 742 F.3d 984 (Fed. Cir. 2014) This action arose out of the design and construction of military housing units at a U.S. Navy facility…
Best Practices Construction Law
Differing Site Conditions and Why You Should Read Pages 17-20 of the Metcalf Decision
It's Friday morning and there are probably better things you would like to do with your remaining day than read a 22-page government contracts decision. But if you have ever…