Cig Contractors, Inc. v. Mississippi State Bldg. Commission, No. 52681
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi |
| Writing for the Court | WALKER; PATTERSON |
| Citation | 399 So.2d 1352 |
| Parties | CIG CONTRACTORS, INC. v. MISSISSIPPI STATE BUILDING COMMISSION. |
| Decision Date | 03 June 1981 |
| Docket Number | No. 52681 |
Page 1352
v.
MISSISSIPPI STATE BUILDING COMMISSION.
Rehearing Denied July 8, 1981.
Page 1353
Rolf L. Anderson, Reynolds & Johnson, Jackson, for appellant.
Bill Allain, Atty. Gen. by Richard E. Ulmer, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Donald Clark, Jr., McKibben, Tolbert & Associates, Jackson, for appellee.
Before SMITH, P. J., and WALKER and BROOM, JJ.
WALKER, Justice, for the Court:
Cig Contractors, Inc. filed a declaration in the Circuit Court of the First Judicial District of Hinds County, Mississippi, against the Mississippi State Building Commission, seeking damages in the sum of $120,000 which were alleged to have resulted from the Commission's breach of contract. The trial court sustained the demurrer to the declaration and Cig appeals.
The declaration alleges that Cig Contractors, Inc., and the Mississippi State Building Commission entered into a contract on February 17, 1975, for the construction of a portion of the physical science facility (chemistry building) at the University of Mississippi. This contract required Cig to be responsible for the concrete, masonry, and general contracting work on the project. The Building Commission entered into separate contracts with B. J. Lee Company for the mechanical portion; Warren Electric Company for the electrical portion; and Hamilton Industries, Inc., for the laboratory case-work portion.
The declaration further alleges that after the Building Commission issued the notice to proceed, Cig began the excavation work for the construction of the utilities tunnel which was to be built under the main structure of the project. After installing the utility tunnel, Cig backfilled around the tunnel as required by the plans and specifications.
Page 1354
B. J. Lee Company then excavated down to the elevation required to install various mechanical pipes which entered the walls of the tunnel. After the back fill around the tunnel was put back in place under the inspection and observation of the Building Commission, Cig placed a concrete slab on top of the backfill. Sometime after the concrete slab was poured it was noted that one of the pipes extending out of a concrete wall in an area adjacent to the elevator shaft was tilted. Upon further investigation it was found that the pipe had no soil compacted around it. It became necessary for Cig to remove the concrete slab in order to rebuild and replace the subsoil which had eroded from under the slab.In its declaration Cig seeks to recover $80,000, the repair costs incurred by Cig involved in removing and replacing the concrete slab and compacting the soil underneath it. The suit also seeks to recover from the Building Commission an additional $40,000 in overhead costs.
The declaration alleges that the Building Commission had the duty to test and inspect the soil prior to the placing of the concrete slab by Cig, quoting Section 2c of the specifications to the contract, which states:
Soils Testing and Inspection Service: Owner will provide soils testing and inspection service for quality control testing during earth-work operations.
The declaration also alleges that B. J. Lee Company, under its contract with the Building Commission, was to have packed in the dirt below the concrete slab in order to prevent water from entering the subgrade, and that the Building Commission's failure to enforce these provisions of B. J. Lee Company's contract damaged the work of Cig, requiring the extensive repairs. The declaration also alleges that the Commission's actions or inactions were a breach of its implied promise and obligation to coordinate and cooperate with Cig and to do nothing which would hinder, delay or otherwise interfere with the performance by Cig of its contract.
To this declaration the Building Commission demurred, which demurrer was sustained...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Suddith v. University of Southern Miss., No. 2005-CA-02130-COA.
...(citing Miss. State Dept. of Welfare v. Howie, 449 So.2d 772, 776-77 (Miss.1984); Cig Contractors v. Miss. State Bldg. Comm'n, 399 So.2d 1352, 1355 (Miss. 1981)). As we have already discussed that suit against USM is improper under § 1983, so the sovereign immunity issue is 977 So.2d 1170 i......
-
Enlargement of Corporate Limits of City of Hattiesburg, Matter of, No. 89-CA-0135
...492 So.2d at 290; Enlargement of Yazoo City, 452 So.2d at 838; Extension of Boundaries of City of Clinton, 450 So.2d at 89; Curet, 399 So.2d at 1352. II. OAK GROVE AND SHADOW WOOD'S Oak Grove and Shadow Wood appeal the court's decision to annex the Lamar County commercial property belonging......
-
Doe v. University Of Mississippi, CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:18-CV-138-DPJ-FKB
...for a breach of contract when it enters into a contract." Pl.'s Mem. [50] at 33; see Cig Contractors, Inc. v. Miss. State Bldg. Comm'n , 399 So.2d 1352, 1355 (Miss. 1981). But a state's "general waiver of sovereign immunity ... does not constitute a waiver by the state of its constitutional......
-
Womble By and Through Havard v. Singing River Hosp., Nos. 90-CA-40
...contract." 449 So.2d at 777. Appellants also direct the Court's attention to Cig Contractors v. Mississippi State Building Commission, 399 So.2d 1352 (Miss.1981), where Justice Walker, writing for the Court, expressed that he "doubt[ed] seriously that this court would uphold a claim of sove......
-
Suddith v. University of Southern Miss., No. 2005-CA-02130-COA.
...(citing Miss. State Dept. of Welfare v. Howie, 449 So.2d 772, 776-77 (Miss.1984); Cig Contractors v. Miss. State Bldg. Comm'n, 399 So.2d 1352, 1355 (Miss. 1981)). As we have already discussed that suit against USM is improper under § 1983, so the sovereign immunity issue is 977 So.2d 1170 i......
-
Enlargement of Corporate Limits of City of Hattiesburg, Matter of, No. 89-CA-0135
...492 So.2d at 290; Enlargement of Yazoo City, 452 So.2d at 838; Extension of Boundaries of City of Clinton, 450 So.2d at 89; Curet, 399 So.2d at 1352. II. OAK GROVE AND SHADOW WOOD'S Oak Grove and Shadow Wood appeal the court's decision to annex the Lamar County commercial property belonging......
-
Doe v. University Of Mississippi, CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:18-CV-138-DPJ-FKB
...for a breach of contract when it enters into a contract." Pl.'s Mem. [50] at 33; see Cig Contractors, Inc. v. Miss. State Bldg. Comm'n , 399 So.2d 1352, 1355 (Miss. 1981). But a state's "general waiver of sovereign immunity ... does not constitute a waiver by the state of its constitutional......
-
Womble By and Through Havard v. Singing River Hosp., Nos. 90-CA-40
...contract." 449 So.2d at 777. Appellants also direct the Court's attention to Cig Contractors v. Mississippi State Building Commission, 399 So.2d 1352 (Miss.1981), where Justice Walker, writing for the Court, expressed that he "doubt[ed] seriously that this court would uphold a claim of sove......
-
FFF Sovereign Immunity Series ' Part V
...6 Churchill vs. Pearl River Basin Dev. Dist., 619 So.2d 900, 903 (Miss. 1993). See also Cig Contractors v. Miss. State. Bldg. Comm'n, 399 So.2d 1352 (Miss. 1981) stating "[W]here the state has lawfully entered into a business contract with an individual, the obligations and duties of the co......