Abstract
This paper will focus on the legal liability issues facing the professional engineer engaged in the design and construction administration of facilities built on expansive soils. These legal liability issues will be discussed from the perspectives of the geotechnical, civil, and structural engineer to alert those professionals to the legal ramifications of their daily activities. By focusing on these legal aspects facing the engineers that are involved in the process of building on expansive soils, hopefully litigation can be avoided or successfully defended. Attention to the legal ramifications of engineering is mandated by today’s litigious environment in the construction industry, especially when designing and administering the construction of facilities built on expansive soils.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
A&F Properties, LLC v. Lake Caroline, Inc., 775 So.2d 1276 (Miss. Ct. App. 2000).
American Institute of Architects (AIA). (2007). “General conditions of contract for construction.” AIA A201, §§4.2.6, 13.5, Washington, D.C.
Barker, R. M., et al. (1991). “Manuals for the design of bridge foundations.” National Cooperative Highway Research Program Rep. No. 343, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
Bevis Const. Co. v. Cottrell, 139 So.2d 375 (Miss. 1962).
Board of Education of McDowell County v. Zando, Martin & Millstead, Inc., 390 S.E.2d 796 (W.Va. 1990).
Board of Trustees of Utica Junior College v. Lee Electric Co., 198 So.2d 231, 234 (Miss. 1967).
Coduto, D. P. (1999). Geotechnical engineering-principles and practices, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J., 759.
Dame Const. Co., Inc. v. Independent Const. Co., 2004 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 7036 at ∗2-∗3 (Cal. Ct. App. July 28, 2004).
Das, B. M. (1990), Principles of geotechnical engineering, 5th Ed., PWS-Kent Publishing Company, Boston, 731.
Dickerson Const. Co., Inc. v. Process Engineering Co., Inc., 341 So.2d 646, 652 (Miss. 1977).
Engineers’ Joint Contract Documents Committee (EJCDC). (2002). “Standard form of agreement between owner and engineer for professional services.” EJCDC E-500, Article 13, Washington, D.C.
Engineers’ Joint Contract Documents Committee (EJCDC). (2007). “Standard general condition of the construction contract.” EJCDC C-700, Articles 6.01, 13.03, 13.06, Washington, D.C.
Federal Highway Administration. (1985). Checklist and guidelines for review of geotechnical reports and preliminary plans and specifications, U.S. DOT, 33.
Garner v. Hickman, 733 So.2d 141 (Miss. 1999).
George B. Gilmore Co. v. Garrett, 582 So.2d 387, 389 (Miss. 1991).
Hadley v. Baxendale, 5 Eng. Rule Cas. 502 (1854).
Harris v. Williams, 679 So.2d 990, 990-91 (La. Ct. App. 1996).
Harrison v. MacMillan, 828 So.2d 756 (Miss. 2002).
Hoang v. Abbess, 80 P.3d 863, 865, 869 (Col. App. 2003).
Illinois Central Gulf Railroad Co. v. Southern Rock, Inc. (5th Cir. 1981).
International Code Council. (2006). International building code, Washington, D.C., CC 1704, 1705 1802, 1803, ⟨http://www.iccsafe.org⟩.
Johnson v. Black Brothers, Inc., 879 So.2d 525 (Miss. Ct. App. 2004).
Magnolia Const. Co., Inc. v. Mississippi Gulf South Engineer, Inc., 518 So.2d 1194, 1202 (Miss. 1988).
Mayor and City of Columbus, Mississippi v. Clark-Dietz and Associates-Engineers, Inc., 550 F. Supp. 610, 623 (N.D. Miss. 1982).
Mockbee, D. W. (2005). Mississippi construction law, 2nd Ed., HLK Global Communications, Inc., Vienna, Va., 125.
Mockbee, D. W. (2011). “Architect engineer expert witnesses: Professionals or prostitutes.” The American College of Construction Lawyers Journal, in press.
Newman Memorial Hospital v. Walton Const. Co., Inc., 149 P.3d 525, 531 (Kan. Ct. App. 2007).
Noonan Const. Co., Inc. v. Warren Brothers Co., 632 F.2d 1189 (5th Cir. 1980).
Penna v. Davidson Homes, Inc., 2003 C. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1165, at ∗1 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 3, 2003).
Ryan v. Morgan Spear Associates, Inc., 546 S.W.2d 678, 679 (Tex. Ct. App. 1977).
Sowers, G. F. (1979). Introductory soil mechanics and foundation engineering: Geotechnical engineering, MacMillan Publishing Co., New York, 621.
State Farm Lloyds v. Mireles, 63 S.W.2d 491, 496-98 (Tex. Ct. App. 2001).
Sumrall Church of the Lord Jesus Christ v. Johnson, 757 So.2d 311 (Miss. Ct. App. 2000).
Town of Winnsboro v. Barnard & Burk, Inc., 294 So.2d 867 (La. Ct. App. 1974).
Trinity v. The City of Westminster, 848 P.2d 916, 919 (Col. 1993).
U.S. Department of Navy. (1982). NAVFAC DM-7.1—Soil mechanics, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Norfolk, Va., 348.
W.C. Fore Trucking, Inc. (1989). Armed Service Board of Contract Appeals, 89-2 BCA ¶21,869 (ASPCA No. 32156, March 17, 1989).
Western Technologies, Inc. v. Neal, 768 P.2d 165, 166-67 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1988).
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities
Volume 25 • Issue 1 • February 2011
Pages: 7 - 17
Copyright
© 2011 ASCE.
History
Received: Jun 23, 2009
Accepted: Nov 20, 2009
Published online: Jan 14, 2011
Published in print: Feb 2011
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.