This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Contracts
Breach of Contract
Construction

Granite Construction Co. v. City of El Centro and Nolte Associates Inc.

Published: Aug. 16, 2008 | Result Date: Jun. 9, 2008 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: GIC875004 Settlement –  $2,240,000

Court

San Diego Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Jeffrey S. Hood
(Procopio, Cory, Hargreaves & Savitch LLP)

Tim Salter


Defendant

Kimberly A. Blake

Roger P. Heyman

Traci S. Lagasse
(Lagasse Branch Bell Kinkead LLP)


Facts

In Oct. 2003, plaintiff Granite Construction Co. and the city of El Centro entered a construction agreement for work on the Alder Canal Trunk Sewer Main and Lift Stations Project. The city hired Nolte Associates Inc. (Nolte) for construction management services.

Granite brought an action against El Centro, asserting that the city breached the contract by providing incorrect data, failing to establish the right of way from private owners, interfering with Granite's work, and failing to compensate for work done as well as cost expenses.

Granite also brought an action against Nolte, asserting negligence in performance of its managing service. Granite filed an amended complaint, claiming that a special relationship existed between Granite and Nolte. Nolte denied this contention, filing an answer as well as a motion for summary judgment, which was denied.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Granite asserted that El Centro breached the contract by offering insufficient information, specifically, the city had misrepresented groundwater and soil factors, thus causing delay and additional work. Granite contended that Nolte was negligent when it instructed Granite on procedures for unfavorable conditions, directions that contradicted initial project plans.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Nolte asserted it was not negligent. El Centro denied any claims and cross-complained, arguing that Granite breached the contract when it failed to complete performance properly and timely. El Centro further claimed that Granite failed to fix claimed defects.

Result

Parties reached a settlement of $2,240,000, of which El Centro is responsible for $1.7 million.


#107829

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390