Originally posted 2013-07-04 10:00:14.
I have discussed the necessity of following your well-drafted contract documents and obtaining written change orders on numerous occasions here at Construction Law Musings. Recently, the U. S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia in Richmond, VA gave a strong reminder regarding these two business practices for contractors.
In Carolina Conduit Systems Inc. v. MasTec N.A. Inc. the Court considered an all too familiar situation. In Carolina Conduit, the general contractor told the sub contractor “not to worry” about payment for excess flowable fill provided by the subcontractor. Based upon this representation, Carolina Conduit performed the additional work and then attempted to get MasTec to pay for that work. As you may predict, a dispute arose regarding this issue and Carolina Conduit sued for (among other expenses) the additional expense it incurred based upon the unforeseen need to provide excess flowable fill.
