Legal Opinion

Graham v. Concord Construction, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided May 18, 2000No. 18131-6-IIIPublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSweeney, J.

— The dispositive question here is whether federal or state law provides immunity from claims by a third party for a private contractor who builds a fish screen according to United States Bureau of Reclamation specifications. We conclude it does not because there is a sufficient showing of negligence in the performance of the contract to avoid summary judgment. We, therefore, reverse the trial judge’s conclusion to the contrary and remand for trial on the merits.

FACTS

Concord Construction, Inc., successfully bid to construct a fish screen for the United States Bureau of Reclamation. The screen…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Boyle v. United Technologies Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
  2. Folsom v. Burger KingWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Folsom v. Burger KingWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Berschauer/Phillips Construction Co. v. Seattle School District No. 1Washington Supreme Court · 1994
  5. Ruff v. County of KingWashington Supreme Court · 1995

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Garza v. McCain Foods, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2004
  2. Garza v. McCain Foods, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2004
  3. Graham v. Concord Construction, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2000
  4. Bertha Griffith v. Edmonds School DistrictCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2014
  5. Chen v. U.S. Bank National AssociationDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 2020

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API