This article describes a jury trial arising out of a highway construction contract and the precluding of the plaintiff contractor from obtaining a trial on the merits of the issues decided by the engineer. After hearing the presentation of both the contractor and state personnel, and after questions and discussions, the Board of Review (Sacramento, California) took the matter under submission and eventually recommended that the contractor's claim for relief for liquidated damages be denied. The State Highway Engineer considered the Board's recommendation, which set forth in detail the positions of the parties, as well as the contract provisions and documents relating to the contractor's claim. He subsequently issued his determination that the contractor's late completion was in the result of an act of God or flood, and that the contractor's claim for relief from liquidated damages would be denied. The details of the case are discussed and the observation is made that if the jury's province can be restricted as in this case, juries (or judges) will not be required to answer the complex and estoeric questions of engineering and contract interpretation which attorneys have traditionally feared are beyond the comprehension of a jury.

  • Corporate Authors:

    Transportation Research Board

    A4005: Committee on Contract Law
    Washington, DC  United States  20418
  • Authors:
    • Bell, J R
    • Kirschman, J R
  • Publication Date: 1977-7

Media Info

Subject/Index Terms

Filing Info

  • Accession Number: 00389116
  • Record Type: Publication
  • Files: TRIS, TRB
  • Created Date: Nov 30 1984 12:00AM