Real Estate Services

New York Offices

MANHATTAN
112 West 34th Street
18th Floor
New York, NY 10120
CALL
(917) 508-7769

UNIONDALE
626 RexCorp Plaza
6th Floor West Tower
Uniondale, New York 11556
CALL
(516) 462-7051


Florida Office

FT. LAUDERDALE
110 East Broward Boulevard
Suite 1700
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
CALL
(954) 271-6053

Construction Law Blog

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

Are We On The Same Page? How Construction Document Conflicts Are Resolved

  
  
  
  

     Given the large number and variety of documents required to administer a construction project today (plans, specifications, contracts, etc.), the likelihood of discrepancies arising between these different sources is almost unavoidable.

     Do you know how these documents rate in terms of their authority?

     A clear understanding of which document is “controlling” is critical to resolving discrepancies in the event of a legal conflict. The following is a brief refresher on the analysis made by the courts in New York.

     In cases where numerous documents are executed together, by the same parties, to govern the same subject matter, all documents are considered contemporaneous and will be read together in their entirety.

     However, when inconsistencies are found among these documents, New York courts will apply the following logic to determine the controlling terms:

     Any specific document or specific language is controlling over a general document or general language. For example, if a transaction is governed by two documents, one being a standardized contract and the other being specifically drafted for the transaction, conflicts will be controlled by the specifically drafted document over the general document.

     Similarly, conflicts between plans and specifications are resolved under the general rule that specifications exhibit control over plans, as per New York case law from 1954. However, certain types of specifications, such as “Additional conditions” or “standard specifications applicable to all contracts” are excluded from this rule and are not deemed controlling when in conflict with the plans. In such cases the plans (as prepared specifically for the specific construction project) are determined to be the controlling documents.

Your comments are invited in the field below.

John Caravella construction lawyerThe author, John Caravella Esq., is a construction attorney and formerly practicing project architect at The Law Office of John Caravella, P.C., representing architects, engineers, contractors, subcontractors, and owners in all phases of contract preparation, litigation, and arbitration. He also serves as an arbitrator to the American Arbitration Association Construction Industry Panel. Mr. Caravella can be reached by email: John@LIConstructionLaw.com or (516)462-7051

 

  textformat-leading2p-alignleft

This is a general information article and should not be construed as legal advice or a legal opinion.  Readers are encouraged to seek counsel from a construction lawyer for advice on a particular circumstance.
 

 

 

 

Comments

• Group: Construction Business Owner 
• Discussion: Are We On The Same Page? How Construction Document Conflicts Are Resolved  
Great article and thank you for sharing. From a Federal contractor perspective, in addition to the described legal understandings, contractors should be aware of these two concepts: 
 
1. In the absence of a specification or drawing otherwise, industry standard and trade practice are required and will prevail, should litigation occur, and 
 
2. A contractor is entitled to make his own reasonable interpretation of the contract documents. Even if the owner's interpretation is deemed more reasonable, as long as the contactor's interpretation is reasonable for him or her (under the circumstances), as the drafter of the documents, the owner will lose. The idea is that the owner could have said anything he or she wanted, so if the wording or diagrams are subject to more than one interpretation, those who provided the documents will lose. 
 
Interestingly, owners, architects and engineers have tried numerous times to write exculpatory mandates, such as "Owners interpretation will prevail.", or "The more stringent interpretation of the documents will be required.", with the result that unknowledgable contractors add contingencies to their bids to cover unanticipated costs. 
 
In our Government Construction Advanced Training Workshops ( see results atwww.GCExperts.com/testimonials ), contractors and subcontractors learn our Blueprint for success on federal contracts and how to bid and handle the many intricacies of contract document interpretation. 
 
For those contractors that have not yet registered to bid on Federal contracts, all the training is free and on-line atwww.GCExperts.com. Learn more on YouTube.com, just put "Powerful Federal Training" in the YouTube search bar and watch the video.  
Posted by Doug Reitmeyer  
Like this discussion » Comment » Stop Following Discussion »  
 
Posted @ Sunday, July 31, 2011 3:56 PM by John Caravella
Thank you for your article. A good refresher for all involved in the construction process. 
 
Tony L. Cummings, AIA, CIS 
Construction Forensics, Inc.  
Posted by Tony Cummings, AIA, CSI  
Posted @ Sunday, July 31, 2011 3:57 PM by John Caravella
Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics

Subscribe by Email

Your email:

Follow Me

Categories