Carr Business Enterprises, Inc. v. City of Chowchilla

Bad Law
166 Cal. App. 4th 14·2008 Cal. App. LEXIS 1333·82 Cal. Rptr. 3d 128
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 20, 2008F051999California3,020 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wiseman, J.

In the published portion of this opinion, we affirm the denial of a request for contractual attorney fees, concluding that the provision relied upon to authorize fees is a standard indemnity clause. We conclude these types of provisions do not create a reciprocal right to fees, despite a reference to performance of work under the contract.

In the unpublished portion of the opinion, we affirm an award of prejudgment interest payable on retention damages from the date the contract work was completed, despite the existence of offset claims and a dispute regarding liability.

PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL HISTORIES

In 1996, the City of Chowchilla (Chowchilla) contracted, in two separate agreements, with Carr Business Enterprises, Inc. (Carr), to do some improvement work on city streets and at the municipal airport. Insurance Company of the West (West) supplied the performance bond for Carr on the construction projects. A series of problems arose delaying the work, which was not finished within the contractual timeframe. Both projects ultimately were completed by July 1997. Additional costs were incurred by Carr, which Chowchilla refused to pay, and litigation followed, with Carr…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.