Chantilly Construction Corp. v. Department of Highways & Transportation

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating general rule that contractor will not be entitled to additional compensation due to an unforeseen difficulty
• noting viability of a Spearin claim for damages caused by a public body’s faulty plans and specifications
• \[A]ll of the provisions of a contract should be construed together and those which appear to conflict should be harmonized whenever it is reasonably possible.\
• “Courts have been reticent to find that generally worded contract provisions place the burden of defective specifications on the contractor”
• “[A]ll of the provisions of a contract should be construed together and those which appear to conflict should be harmonized whenever it is reasonably possible.” (alteration in original) (quoting Seaward v. Am. Hardware Co., 171 S.E. 650, 659 (Va. 1933))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).