Legal Opinion
Basin Paving Co. v. Mike M. Johnson, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Washington
Decided May 29, 2001No. 19224-5-IIIPublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSweeney, J.
A contractor may recover for a changed condition when it “could not reasonably have been anticipated by either party to the contract.” Bignold v. King County, 65 Wn.2d 817, 821-22, 399 P.2d 611 (1965). Mike M. Johnson, Inc., (MMJ) was awarded the contract for the Town of Lind’s wastewater and water system project. MMJ *63encountered more subsurface rock than it expected based on boring tests conducted on behalf of Lind. The trial court summarily dismissed MMJ’s cross-claims against Lind for additional compensation based on a “changed condition.”
We agree with the trial court that there was no…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Folsom v. Burger KingWashington Supreme Court · 1998
- Folsom v. Burger KingWashington Supreme Court · 1998
- Bignold v. King CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1965
- Modern Builders, Inc. v. MankeCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1980
- Ford v. Red Lion InnsCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1992
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Basin Paving Co. v. Contractors Bonding & InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2004
- Basin Paving Co. v. Mike M. Johnson, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2001
- Basin Paving Co. v. CONTRACTORS BONDING AND INS. CO.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2004
- Pacheco v. AmesCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2002
- King County v. Vinci Construction Grands Projets/Parsons RCI/Frontier-Kemper, JVCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.