Williams Bros. Constr., Inc. v. Bd. of Trs. of Heartland Cmty. Coll. Dist. 540
| Decision Date | 07 May 2018 |
| Docket Number | NO. 4-17-0436,4-17-0436 |
| Citation | 2018 IL App (4th) 170436 -U |
| Parties | WILLIAMS BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF HEARTLAND COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT 540, Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
NOTICE
This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1).
Appeal from Circuit Court of McLean County
Honorable Paul G. Lawrence, Judge Presiding.
¶ 1 Held: The appellate court affirmed, finding (1) the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to treat as a judicial admission defendant's adoption of plaintiff's expert, (2) the court did not abuse its discretion in allowing the introduction of certain evidence, and (3) the jury's verdicts were not legally inconsistent.
¶ 2 In September 2011, plaintiff, Williams Brothers Construction, Inc. (WBCI), filed a complaint against defendant, Board of Trustees of Heartland Community College District 540 (Heartland), alleging three counts of breach of contract and one count of quantum meruit. In February 2017, a jury found in favor of WBCI on two counts and in favor of Heartland on two counts. The jury awarded $10,628 in damages to WBCI.
¶ 3 On appeal, WBCI argues (1) the trial court abused its discretion by refusing to treat Heartland's adoption of the opinions of WBCI's expert as a judicial admission, (2) the court abused its discretion by allowing Heartland to introduce certain evidence, and (3) the jury's verdicts were legally inconsistent. We affirm.
¶ 6 This case involves the construction of the fitness and recreation center (fitness center) on Heartland's campus. WBCI was the general contractor. WBCI had as its project manager, Rodney Justus; its on-site superintendent, John Carlson; and its vice president of operations overseeing the project, Joseph Williams. Heartland contracted with BLDD Architects, Inc. (BLDD), whose managing project architect was Bruce Maxey, to prepare construction documents consisting of the drawings and specifications for the construction of the fitness center and provide site observation services during the project. BLDD contracted with KJWW Engineering Consultants, P.C. (KJWW), as its structural steel consultant, and Kevin Gross acted as KJWW's structural design engineer for the project.
¶ 8 In February 2008, WBCI entered into a contract with Heartland in the amount of $50,371,000 for site development and the construction of six buildings on Heartland's campus, including the fitness center. The fitness center was designed as a structural steel-framed building consisting of a high-roofed center area over the gymnasium floor surrounded on three sides by lower-roof areas. The structural steel frame for the fitness center was depicted in contract drawings with what are termed "grid lines," which are used to assist in locating various parts of the steel frame by acting like the latitude and longitude grid on a map. The design of the fitness center provided for a running track around the inside perimeter of the second level's center area of the building.
¶ 9 The high-roof structure of the fitness center was designed as a metal roof deck supported by four scissor trusses spanning in an east-west direction over the open center recreation area of the building. The design of the structural framing of the fitness center called for a long steel girder of a specified length oriented in the north-south direction. The girder truss consisted of a top section known as a top chord, a bottom section known as a bottom chord, and various steel members that connected the top chord to the bottom chord. The girder truss was designed to extend between structural members in the steel frame and to carry loads from other structural members. The scissor trusses were designed to be supported on their east ends by the top chord of the steel girder truss. Column L-10 was designed as an 8 x 8 5/8-inch steel tubular column, 35 feet and 2 inches tall, supported at the base by a concrete foundation at the first floor and connected to and braced in an east-west direction by the running-track framing at the second-floor elevation.
¶ 10 In August 2008, WBCI began construction of the fitness center, and the contract required the building to be substantially completed by October 21, 2009. WBCI subcontracted the steel fabrication work to Premier Fabrication, Inc. (Premier Fabrication), and the steel erection works to Tyjax Ironworks, Inc. That same month, and prior to commencing construction of the steel framing for the fitness center, WBCI submitted certain documents, known as "shop drawings" prepared by Premier Fabrication, to BLDD for review.
¶ 11 On or about June 4, 2009, WBCI, Heartland, BLDD, and KJWW observed the girder truss had deflected horizontally to the east and column L-10, which was connected to the truss, had deflected both to the south and to the east. These observations raised concerns to WBCI, Heartland, BLDD, and KJWW about the integrity of the steel framing along grid line 10, including the girder truss and column L-10. At the time of these observations, the steel structurehad been erected and the metal roof decking had been installed, but no exterior walls or roofing materials were in place. Also, the running track at the second level of the structure had been installed and the concrete base for the running track had been poured in May 2009.
¶ 12 As of June 4, 2009, the structural framing system of the fitness center was carrying only about 30% of the total gravity design load and "there was minimal gravity live load on the structural framing system." Construction on the east side of the fitness center impacted by the girder truss and column deflections was stopped on June 4, 2009, both to ensure no further gravity or construction load would be added to the structure and so an investigation could be made regarding the cause of the observed deflections. WBCI and its subcontractors continued to work on the north and west sides of the fitness center.
¶ 13 Several days after the deflections were observed, Gross, KJWW's design engineer, advised the slotted holes in the scissor trusses needed to be redone to the 1 7/8-inch length called for in the design in order to allow the scissor trusses to move 1.1 inch at the truss bearing. In a letter to WBCI, Darrell Stoller, Premier's structural division manager, stated the slotted holes in the scissor truss east legs were fabricated five-eighths of an inch too short.
¶ 14 In July 2009, Justus of WBCI sent a letter to Maxey at BLDD with an estimate of the repair work for the fitness-center trusses. WBCI priced the work at $176,187. In late July or early August 2009, Heartland hired the structural engineering firm of Maurer-Stutz, Inc. (Maurer-Stutz), to survey the steel framing. The survey indicated columns C-10 and L-10 were located three-fourths of an inch too close to each other and column C-10 was set nine-sixteenths of an inch too low.
¶ 15 Continuing through 2009, communications about the deflections took place between WBCI, Heartland, BLDD, and KJWW. WBCI believed the deflections were caused byerrors in design, not due to faulty construction. KJWW was of the opinion that the deflections were due to faulty construction and not design errors.
¶ 16 On February 17, 2010, BLDD issued a revised construction change directive (revised CCD4) that identified certain repair/remediation work to parts of the structural steel framing of the fitness center that WBCI was to perform and listed the costs for that work. The repair/remediation and shoring work identified in revised CCD4 pertained to column L-10 reinforcement, girder truss reinforcement, cross-bracing of the scissor trusses, and shoring. The actual costs incurred by WBCI for the repair/remediation work totaled $158,977. WBCI began the shoring and steel repair/remediation work on February 16, 2010, and completed it on March 24, 2010. After completing this work, WBCI continued construction of the fitness center, which was substantially completed on November 15, 2010.
¶ 18 In September 2011, WBCI filed a complaint against Heartland, alleging three counts of breach of contract. In count I, WBCI alleged Heartland's failure to pay for the costs of the shoring and repair/remediation work directed and agreed to by revised CCD4 constituted a material breach of the contract. Count I sought $158,977 in damages for the actual costs incurred to perform the directed shoring and repair/remediation work.
¶ 19 In count II, WBCI alleged Heartland failed to (1) provide plans and specifications for the construction of the fitness center which were accurate, adequate, and suitable for WBCI to construct the building without experiencing unintended yielding and deflection to a material degree of some or all of the building's structural steel system; (2) provide WBCI with a timely resolution of the structural issues observed on June 4, 2009, causing construction to stop and thus unduly hindering, interfering, delaying, and/or disrupting WBCI's construction of the buildingand unnecessarily extending the time of performance; and (3) take reasonable steps to mitigate and minimize the impact of any delay and disruption to WBCI's ability to timely complete the building work by failing to timely give WBCI direction for resolving the structural issues. WBCI alleged Heartland's breach of contract caused it to incur increased costs and expenses of construction, which would not have been incurred had the fitness center been constructed without the delay necessary to perform the shoring and repair/remediation work. Count II sought $1,623,043 in damages.
¶ 20 Count III alleged WBCI was required to perform additional work to remedy other...
To continue reading
Request your trial