Contractors sometimes bid public works contracts with the hope, or even expectation, that they can obtain a change order after contract award to increase the contract price. As a Minnesota court recently observed, this is a “calculated business risk” that can be a long-shot gamble.
The initial set of bid documents contained an ambiguity regarding the scope of work, which was cleaned up with an addendum. The low bidder said it never saw the addendum. The project owner reiterated the full scope of work, and the bidder signed the contract despite being given the opportunity to withdraw its bid.
The other case in this issue involved expert-witness information of project owners suing two architectural firms for professional negligence. The case could not be proved without expert opinion regarding the applicable standard of care, and the project owners had only one expert architect witness. The owners should have been more careful regarding compliance with a court-ordered schedule for disclosure of information. The expert’s reports and testimony were excluded from trial.
