(Download) "Denton Construction Company v. Missouri" by Supreme Court of Missouri Division 2 # Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Denton Construction Company v. Missouri
- Author : Supreme Court of Missouri Division 2
- Release Date : January 13, 1970
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 76 KB
Description
The State Highway Commission of Missouri (hereafter referred to as the "Commission") entered into a contract with the R. B.
Potashnik Company for the construction of the roadbed, 1 ditches, slopes and median for a fifteen mile section of Interstate
Highway 55, a four-lane divided highway. That contract and the work done pursuant to it will hereafter be referred to as Project
16. It was completed in October 1963, and the Commission accepted and approved the work. The Commission then entered into
a contract with plaintiff on January 21, 1964 for a second stage of construction, hereafter referred to as Project 17, which
consisted primarily of laying pavement and soil cement shoulders on the roadbed previously constructed under Project 16. It
also included the construction of guardrails, signs, and some lighting fixtures, but those matters are not material to the
issues on this appeal. At the time plaintiff's representative inspected the project site prior to submitting its bid, there had been some erosion
on the higher fills. In the contract for Project 17, there was Special Provision S entitled "Embankment in Place" which in
substance provided that in submitting its bid plaintiff should include a "lump sum" for work which would be required because
of "conditions resulting from erosion," and in the special provision it was stated that "This item of work will apply to material
necessary to restore the roadbed from outside shoulder to outside shoulder to proper section and the necessary blending into
the fill slopes adjacent thereto." Plaintiff included in its bid a "lump sum" of $20,000 for this item. Material was removed
from the roadbed by rain and wind and deposited in the median and ditches, and the slopes and shoulder areas were damaged.
Before plaintiff could perform the laying of the pavement and the placing of soil cement on the shoulders in accord with the
specifications, this damage to the roadbed had to be repaired. To accomplish this, new and additional material had to be placed
on the roadbed and shoulders, and the material then had to be graded to restore the roadbed to its previous condition. Plaintiff's
claim for $138,910 for performing this work was set forth in Count II of its petition. The Commission took the position that
under the terms of the contract for Project 17, plaintiff was obligated to perform whatever work was necessary to repair all
and any damage to the roadbed resulting from rain and wind erosion.