Summary of Case Robert Chuckrow Construction Company (Chuckrow) was employed as the general contractor to build a Kinney Shoe Store. Chuckrow employed Ralph Gough to perform the carpentry work on the store. The contract with Gough stipulated that he was to provide all labor, materials, tools, equipment, scaffolding, and other items necessary to complete the carpentry work. Gough’s employees erected 38 trusses at the job site. The next day, 32 of the trusses fell off the building. The reason for the trusses having fallen was unexplained, and evidence showed that it was not due to Chuckrow’s fault or a deficiency in the building plans. Chuckrow told Gough that he would pay him to reerect the trusses and continue work. When the job was complete, Chuckrow paid Gough the original contract price but refused to pay him for the additional cost of reerecting the trusses. Gough sued Chuckrow for this expense. Can Gough recover? Introduction This review will address several issues associated with the legal, business, and ethics related with the case. First, it will address the legality of the case by reviewing the difference between a written and oral contract, and the results of recovering fees. Next, this review will analyze the business effect of the case as it relates to the monetary bottom line and Chuckrow’s attempt to protect his profits. Subsequently, it will highlight the unethical behavior of Chuckrow and its potential effects on future subcontractors’ trust in
Government contracting is a lucrative industry, both large and small management and technology consulting firms along with defense, aerospace and other companies who bill themselves as "experts" in various different areas complete for billions of dollars in government contracts each year. The benefit of the federal government leveraging the skills and expertise is great; but there is also a downside. Ethical violations can and have occurred within the government contracting arena. This paper will discuss a case that demonstrates ethical violations in government contracting as well as answer the question of how ethical violations in government contracting affect the role of contracting management acquisition.
The contractor, upon the breach of his obligations, he caused some damages to the owner and he should be exposed to forfeiture.
Chuckrow told Gough that he would pay him to reerect the trusses and continue work. When the job was complete, Chuckrow paid Gough the original contract price but refused to pay him for the additional cost of reerecting the trusses. Gough sued Chuckrow for this expense. Can Gough recover? Robert Chuckrow Construction Company v. Gough, 117 Ga. App. 140, 159 S.E.2d 469, Web 1968 Ga.App. Lexis 1007 (Court of Appeals of Georgia)
BUILD annually reports on the number of clients, different cases, program analysis, and program development yearly.
Overall, Rita and Patrick agreed on many things. I suspect this is due to the similarity of their experiences working in the suburbs and, presumably, they know each other since they are both in the Ed.D program. Both Patrick and Rita agree on the importance of building relationships with the adults in the schools. They also agree that it can be difficult to work with teachers or other staff when they have negative perceptions of students. They also agree that the school psychologist is sometimes treated like an administrator even though they had different words for this (i.e., quasi-secretary paperwork administrators or pseudo-administrator) and discussed how this role confusion can make building relationships with teachers more difficult.
Masters Home Improvement is an Australian home improvement chain that started the market in 2011, and it is managed by the joint venture between Woolworths Limited and Lowe’s, USA in order to create an opportunity for Woolworths Limited to expand its market.
For starters Balfour Beatty need to look at the topography as this is the first thing that is considered before they proceed because they would need to find out whether where they want to start building would be appropriate, depending on the size, if that ground would be suitable to build on for a car park, and whether the land in that area is stable enough. At this point if there is nothing that has come up on the survey they would just scrape it off, this is a process that they would call levelling. Sometimes a surveyor finds soil that isn't suitable for subgrade in specific places, so it’s dug out and replaced with a strong aggregate. This is what would have to happen before they even start to lay the car park because the foundations of
In early 1987, L & A Construction Company started building a bridge in Apalachicola Florida. As the general contractor, L & A subcontracted concrete delivery to Southern Concrete Services. The subcontract required Southern Concrete to obtain a performance bond. Southern received the bond from Fidelity & Deposit Company of Maryland, and started supplying the concrete that same year. According to the court, it is agreed “that Southern failed to provide sufficient concrete to L & A in a timely manner and breached the subcontract in numerous other particulars (L & A Contracting Company v. Southern Concrete Services, Inc., 1994).” L & A complained multiple times about Southern Concrete’s poor quality of concrete and the slow delivery rates. On May 29, 1987, L & A sent a letter to Southern Concrete and F & D informing them that Southern had breached the contract.
The trial court judge should not admit the foregoing evidence because they are not admissible by law. When Wabash Constructor Company acquires the service of Anderson Brick, Inc. to do the bricklaying work, they both signed a written contract agreement. The contract stated that the subcontractor Anderson Brick Inc. was required to complete the work by July 15 and it also specified that the job was time sensitive and need to be completed on time. Failing to do so, the subcontractor will be penalized $2,000 every day for the incurred damages of uncompleted bricklaying before the agreement date. Therefore, their contract is enforceable by law and Anderson Brick Inc. should comply with the written contract. Written contracts provided certain advantages
Boyd Construction Co Inc is a general contractor that is located in Washington, DC. They have over 84 years of experience. Boyd Construction Co Inc has been serving the greater Washington DC area since 1932. Their roofing services include roof installation, roof repair, roof re-sloping, roof re-pitching, roof coating, roof aluminizing, and more Boyd Construction Co Inc also offers siding repair, rotted wood replacement in fascias, soffits, overhangs and trim, porch repair and rebuild, brick waterproofing, chimney waterproofing and repair, siding, and more. Boyd Construction Co Inc is listed on most major search engines such as Angie's List, Home Advidsor, GooglePlus, Facebook, Yahoo, Yelp with a positive rating history and satisfied customer
We would be very interested in quoting your project! We not only are a local general construction and roofing company, but also a BBB "A+" accredited business known for our quality workmanship and low prices. Our general business license number is 27-3485816 and our North Carolina General Contractors License number is 75564. We have full liability and workman's compensation insurance to protect our customers.
F.R.A.U.D.™ Construction is a multi-disciplinary engineering company based in Sacramento, California, which specializes in a variety of infrastructure and roadway construction projects in the West Coast of the United States of America. Ever since its foundation in 2005, F.R.A.U.D.™ Construction has experienced a continuous growth that reaffirms its position as one of the most reliable constructors in the area. We pride ourselves in high customer satisfaction while delivering a quality product. Our key to success is thorough communication internally within our project team and externally with the customer.
Note* (this will be on the backend and not display on the site, unless you are using the word Services on the page title as the actual page title on the Backend - if this is the case, disregard this title and leave it as Building Construction)
My business is called, ‘BRG staircase company LTD’ Our products are bespoke staircases that are modern and spectacularly different compared to our competitors, and then we recommend joiners to fit the staircases into your home, our wooden staircases are manufactured to your specific requirements, complying with the current building regulations. We are committed as a business to work with you on your projects and to assist you with advice on design and materials to help you create the look you are after. The type of manufacturing that we strive in is quickly disappearing but we feel that we can compete against the bigger companies. We offer our customers a superior hand-crafted bespoke product that can be manufactured to your specific requirements. This high standard of craftsmanship, service and materials, without compromise offers a truly bespoke and unique piece of joinery that has customers returning time and time again. Cost is always a factor and we believe customers are looking for great value for money, a quality product with a level of service that they can rely on. We strive to be very competitive and provide advice and alternatives to produce a product that looks spectacular and works within your budget requirements. We offer bespoke staircases in a range of materials, including Redwoods, Southern Yellow Pine, Hemlock, Oak, Ash, Walnut and ,and more. All materials used are quality graded from traceable sustainable sources.
In FY 2014 compared with FY 2013, gross profit of DG Khan Cement Company showed a decrease of 0.73% due to increase in cost of sales by 10.87%. Increase in cost of sales caused reduction in current year’s gross profit. Also in FY 2014, company’s gross profit margin decline to 35% from 37.4%. The main factors backing the reduction in gross profit is increase in royalty rates by more than double from the previous financial year, increase in packaging cost and increase of depreciation by 14% due to capitalization of RDF projects (DG Khan Cement Annual Report, 2014, p.26). Also because of high gas charges and high electricity bills, gross profit is reduced by around 2% in FY 2014.