Wed. Jun 16th, 2021
Auto Draft

Plaintiff highway construction contractor sought review of a decision of the Superior Court of Sacramento County (California), which sustained the demurrer of defendant state, in the contractor’s action for damages and extra costs incurred in the course of a highway construction project.

California Business Lawyer & Corporate Lawyer, Inc. provides counsel on Elements of Conversion Claim

Overview

The highway construction contractor brought an action against the state for damages and extra costs incurred in a highway construction project. The trial court sustained the demurrer of the state. On appeal, the court reversed with directions to permit the contractor to amend its complaint. Claims under the contractor’s contract with the state did not accrue and the two-year period on filing the claims with the state did not start until completion of the settlement procedure established by § 9(f) of the Standard Specifications, codified at Cal. Civ. Proc. § 1875(3). The complaint revealed a strong possibility that the contractor filed additional claims in response to the state highway engineer’s proposed final estimate. The pleading was vulnerable to a special or general demurrer but with leave to amend. The contractor was to have an opportunity to amend in order to allege facts demonstrating that the claim settlement procure provided by the contract was not complete until after September 21, 1961.

Outcome

The court reversed the decision of the trial court, which sustained the demurrer of the state and gave directions to permit the contractor to amend its complaint, in its action against the state for damages and extra costs incurred in the course of a highway construction project.

 

By admin