Preview:

Unified Judicial System

C & W Enterprises, a South Dakota Corporation Plaintiff and Appellee v. City of Sioux Falls Defendant and Appellant [2001 SD 132] South Dakota Supreme Court Appeal from the Circuit Court of The Second Judicial Circuit Minnehaha County, South Dakota Hon. Glen A. Severson, Judge Ronald A. Parsons, Jr. Chad Swenson of Johnson, Heidepriem, Miner, Marlow and Janklow Sioux Falls, South Dakota Attorneys for plaintiff and appellee Lon J. Kouri David A Pfeifle of May, Johnson, Doyle & Becker Sioux Falls, South Dakota Attorneys for defendant and appellant Considered on Briefs October 1, 2001 Opinion Filed 11/7/2001 #21735 GILBERTSON, Chief Justice [¶1.] The City of Sioux Falls (City) and Sweetman Construction Company (Sweetman) entered into a general contract for the construction of an overpass and ramp at the intersection of I229 and Louise Avenue in Sioux Falls. Sweetman subcontracted the sewer and watermain work to C&W Enterprises, Inc. (C&W), with the approval of City. Problems with the project specifications resulted in necessary repairs, the cost of which was born by C&W. C&W sued City for breach of contract and damages. At trial, the jury found for C&W in the amount of $270,000. City moved for judgment n.o.v. and, in the alternative, a new trial. The trial court denied the motion for a new trial, but granted partial judgment n.o.v. on the verdict amount over $180,000. We affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURE [¶2.] On July 9, 1992, the State of South Dakota entered into a contract with Sweetman for work on a portion of the South Dakota Highway system located at the intersection of I229 and Louise Avenue in Sioux Falls. This intersection lies in an area of Lincoln County called the Prairie View watershed and is known for its drainage problems. Sweetman subcontracted the construction of the sanitary sewer system and relocation of the watermain, a portion of the project controlled by City, to C&W on November 24, 1992. Both the original contract and the subcontract were subject to the agreement and approval of City. [¶3.] The terms of the subcontract required that C&W complete the sewer and watermain project in accordance with the terms of the general contract, which was jointly prepared by City and the State. The contract included both general conditions, which are standard specifications incorporated into every City contract, and the more detailed specifications for this particular project. The contract specifications for the sewer and watermain projects were designed, drafted and enforced by the Office of the City Engineer.

file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/Opinions/763760.htm[5/8/2013 8:14:11 PM]

Unified Judicial System

Additionally, a City inspector was assigned to be on site as the work was performed.[1] [¶4.] C&W

Download 763760.pdf

South Dakota Law