Simmons v. Tutor-Saliba Corporation
Published: May 8, 1999 | Result Date: Feb. 3, 1999 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: 7909588 Bench Verdict – $0
Judge
Court
Alameda Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Defendant
Facts
In 1996, the plaintiff Simmons Glass Company had a subcontract agreement with defendant, Tutor-Saliba Corporation, to furnish and install glass and glazing and ticket windows, aluminum curtain wall and entrances, and aluminum storefront and curtain wall systems for the eastside stadium project known as the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum Improvements. The plaintiff contended that it performed extra work; was delayed due to late shipment of materials and a late start of plaintiff's work on the project, and that the delays and extra work damaged plaintiff and were the responsibility of the defendant to pay. The defendant contended that from the start of plaintiff's performance, there were problems, including plaintiff's failure to pay its subcontractors and suppliers; inability to meet its financial obligations, including its own payroll as it became due; failure to provide qualified personnel to the project; failure to organize, coordinate, supervise and provide adequate manpower to the project to properly perform its work and maintain the agreed-to-schedule; and failure to properly install its work thereby resulting in damages and delays to correct the work. The defendant paid for all labor and material charges incurred by plaintiff and was required to pay Simmons' subcontractors and suppliers because of Simmons' failure to meet its own financial obligations. The defendant also paid all of its extra work, including impacts and delays, as set forth in signed change orders agreed to and accepted by plaintiff.
Settlement Discussions
Prior to trial, the defendant offered to settle by paying the plaintiff $40,000, with indications of more available. The plaintiff refused the offer and made no counter-offers.
Damages
The plaintiff alleged a total cost claim of $623,438 for labor, materials, and services, plus attorney's fees, penalties and costs.
Other Information
The verdict was reached approximately one year and three months after the case was filed. ON THE COMPLAINT: The court granted defendant's motion for judgment on the complaint under C.C.P. º638. The court found that plaintiff had failed to sustain its burder of proof on its breach of contract and quantum meruit causes of action. The plaintiff failed to present evidence of any breach by defendant. The plaintiff also failed to present evidence of a change in the original scope of work under the subcontract which would allow plaintiff to recover beyond the original subcontract amount. Evidence was presented at trial that defendant negotiated and agreed to pay for all change order requests which were agreed to, signed by, and accepted by plaintiff. The plaintiff was therefore barred from seeking any additional costs. ON THE CROSS-COMPLAINT: The plaintiff and defendant stipulated that judgment be entered in favor of defendants on its cross-complaint in the amount of $76,910.50, with defendant agreeing not to enter judgment if the amount of $25,285 was paid within one year.
Length
10 days
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390