Plaintiff was a subcontractor on a public contract, and sought payment of $58,774 for extra work. The trial court denied Plaintiff's claim because Plaintiff had failed to obtain prior written approval, as required by the contract. On appeal, the Plaintiff attempted to rely on promises made by an engineer retained by the public authority. The appellate court rejected this claim, confirming the express language of the contract had to be followed.
The lesson to be learned is obvious. Always know and follow the language of the construction contract if asked to do additional work.
