CNST Law and Ethics Pt. 2 from Cases and handouts || with 100% Error-free Answers.
6 views 0 purchase
Module
CNST Law and Ethics
Institution
CNST Law And Ethics
was Zachary Construction the petitioner or respondent? correct answers Petitioner
was Port of Houston the petitioner or respondent? correct answers Respondent
The common law permits a contractor to recover
damages for construction delays caused by the owner, but the
parties are free to corr...
was zachary construction the petitioner or respond
Written for
CNST Law and Ethics
CNST Law and Ethics
Seller
Follow
FullyFocus
Reviews received
Content preview
CNST Law and Ethics Pt. 2 from Cases and handouts || with
100% Error-free Answers.
was Zachary Construction the petitioner or respondent? correct answers Petitioner
was Port of Houston the petitioner or respondent? correct answers Respondent
The common law permits a contractor to recover
damages for construction delays caused by the owner, but the
parties are free to correct answers contract differently
how long was the dock supposed to be in Zachary v. Port of Houston originally? correct answers
1,660 ft, two ships in 5 sections 40 ft deep
how much was the original cost of the wharf? correct answers $62,485,733
"the port authority shall ____ have the rig to control the manner" of building correct answers not
what type of conditions did zachary want to work in? correct answers in-the-dry
how long did zachary have to complete the 2 sections for the chinese ship? correct answers 20
months
what were the liquidated damages for being late to deliver the 2 sections for the chinese ship?
correct answers $20,000 a day
what concerns did the port have with zacharys plan for the change order? correct answers they
were concerned that freezing the ground
near the piers might destabilize them, weakening the wharf
and making it unsafe.
the jury found in favor of: correct answers zachary
Texas supreme court found in favor of: correct answers Port of Houston
Zachary had to pay above all else _____ correct answers damages (rust) on defective fenders for
$970,000
was MASTEC the petitioner or respondent? correct answers Respondent
was El Paso the petitioner or respondent? correct answers Petitioner
what is the case over regarding MASTEC and El Paso? correct answers breach of contract by the
owner in not following through due diligence locating foreign crossings
, In MASTEC v. El Paso, Texas supreme court found in favor of: correct answers El Paso, Mastec
had the responsibility of confirming the foreign crossings
the end result of MASTEC v. El Paso, Texas correct answers The court found that the contract
allocated all risk to the contractor for unknown
obstacles discovered during the construction process.
Accordingly, we reverse the court of appeals'
judgment and reinstate the trial court's judgment
What was El Paso's project? correct answers a 68 mile 8" pipeline for petroleum, the line was too
shallow and needed to be deeper, replace line with new one for butane
Mastec was trying to branch out into a new field of work correct answers bid significantly lower
than all other bidders by about 4 million
foreign crossings correct answers other pipelines, utilities, roads,
rivers, canals, fences, wells, cables, and concrete
structures
undiscovered foreign crossings were ____ correct answers within the scope of work
Mastec filed ____ over the 794 unknown crossings correct answers fraud
What is the case between Pearson and Fullingim (awesome air) over? correct answers breach of
contract since the pearsons signed contract, but had another team do work
the note Mrs. Pearson was correct answers a contract
Mr. and Mrs. Pearson were in the process of divorce and ____ the jury trial correct answers
missed
Mr. Pearson was ____ about the trial, and _____ correct answers negligent in reading the details,
the trial decision remained, so he had to appeal
Mrs. Pearson's suit was ______ correct answers dismissed by awesome air
Mr. Pearson Appealed: correct answers he did not receive notice of the
trial setting, the petition does not support the judgment, and the evidence is factually insufficient
to support the
award
Awesome Air's document was a contract because: correct answers it was clearly stated, just not
on the first page
Awesome Air reserved the right to: correct answers begin work before obtaining pre-payment
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller FullyFocus. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for £8.40. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
