Extended Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in excerpt
Search in comments
Filter by Custom Post Type
Extended Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in excerpt
Search in comments
Filter by Custom Post Type

Emerald Forest Utility District v. Simonsen Construction Company – Case Brief Summary (Texas)

In Emerald Forest Utility District v. Simonsen Construction Company, 679 S.W.2d 51, 52 (Tex. App.--Houston 14th Dist. 1984, writ ref'd n.r.e.) the contractor agreed to construct an underground sewer system according to plans furnished by the owner.

The instructions to bidders had provided for independent investigation of the work site and stated that the submission of a bid was to be "conclusive evidence" that the contractor was "fully acquainted and satisfied" with the quality and quantity of work. Id. at 53.

During construction, the contractor encountered "very wet sand conditions." Id. at 52. There was testimony that an alternate "wet sand construction method" should have been applied. Id.

After the contractor completed the work, the sewer lines failed. Id. The owner sued the contractor. Id. A jury concluded that the lines failed because the design provided by the owner was insufficient. Id.

The court examined the contract and held that the owner had not expressly or implicitly promised that the plans provided were sufficient for the work. Id. at 53.