Traeger Machetanz | Davis Wright Tremaine In Skanska Civil USA Southeast, Inc. ASBCA Nos. 61220, 61347 (April 3, 2025), the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals denied the contractor’s claim for differing site conditions. The contractor asserted claims for defective specifications and a differing site condition arising out of the demolition of two existing piers. A plan… Continue reading Contractor’s Claim Denied: The Importance of Knowing Prior Projects in Differing Site Condition Disputes
Tag: Differing Site Conditions
Timing Matters for Differing Site Conditions
Stephanie Snyder-Zuasnabar | Gray Reed Many construction contracts contain some version of a “differing site conditions” clause. AIA’s A201 general conditions, as well as in the EJCDC equivalent, contains a changed site condition clause. It also appears in most state DOT specifications and federal government construction contracts. Generally, this provision provides for a change order… Continue reading Timing Matters for Differing Site Conditions
The Benefits of Early Geotech Risk Mitigation
Bill Thompson | HKA Of all the risks engineers, contractors, and owners face on construction projects, unknown ground conditions are some of the most critical and costly. Expansive or corrosive soils, depth to bedrock, high groundwater, and a number of other geotechnical challenges can jeopardize the integrity of any structure — as well as the… Continue reading The Benefits of Early Geotech Risk Mitigation
Court Rejects Differing Site Condition Claim for Lack of Timely Notice
John Mark Goodman | BuildSmart A Minnesota federal court dismissed a tunnelling contractor’s differing site condition claim because notice of the condition was given eight days after the conditions were first observed whereas the contract required notice within three days (see Engineering & Construction Innovations, Inc. v. Bradshaw Construction Corp.). The project at issue involves installation of a… Continue reading Court Rejects Differing Site Condition Claim for Lack of Timely Notice
Oregon Ruling Calls Into Question Quantum Meruit Claims in Construction Cases
Matthew Mues | Davis Wright Tremaine On February 15, 2023, the Oregon Court of Appeals ruled that an excavation subcontractor, plaintiff Kizer Excavating Co., (“Kizer”) could not maintain a quantum meruit claim against a general contractor, defendant Stout Building Contractors, LLC, (“Stout”) for work performed by Kizer beyond that contemplated in Kizer’s proposal, which was incorporated into… Continue reading Oregon Ruling Calls Into Question Quantum Meruit Claims in Construction Cases