CHICAGO — Black & Veatch has filed an appeal following a federal court ruling that upheld a jury’s unexpected verdict concerning a troubled wind energy project in Illinois. The jury, convened last year, ruled that subcontractor Boldt Co. owed the prime contractor only one dollar in damages for the project that began in 2019.
Judge Andrea Wood, of the northern district of Illinois, noted in her May ruling that the minimal dollar award suggested the jury had doubts about the cost information presented by Black & Veatch. This verdict has now extended what could have been a resolution into a more protracted legal battle.
In a prior ruling without a jury, Wood determined that Boldt had indeed breached its contract with Black & Veatch, establishing liability for damages. She described the evidence supporting the violation as “overwhelming.” The jury’s role was solely to assess the financial damages owed to Black & Veatch, but the one-dollar verdict took many by surprise, prompting further legal action.
On June 10, Black & Veatch, now partnered with a new legal team, communicated its decision to appeal Wood’s earlier ruling, where she denied both parties’ motions regarding the jury’s decision. Black & Veatch requested a new trial and sought to vacate the jury’s symbolic one-dollar award. Conversely, Boldt sought to amend the court’s judgment, contending it should be entitled to collect outstanding payments from Black & Veatch. Both motions were ultimately denied by Wood.
Wood pointed out that the jury’s decision pivots significantly on its skepticism regarding Black & Veatch’s financial claims. During the project, Black & Veatch entered into a $68 million contract with Capital Power, an Alberta-based wind energy developer, to construct 60 wind turbines in Good Hope, Illinois. The company subsequently subcontracted Boldt for $15 million to handle the physical installation of those turbines.
Boldt attributed delays in its work to Black & Veatch’s failure to provide essential infrastructure, such as proper crane pads and access roads. This argument aligns with Judge Wood’s assessment, which emphasized that these responsibilities were part of Black & Veatch’s contractual obligations. Additionally, Boldt cited delays from General Electric’s incomplete and late deliveries of turbine components as contributing factors.
Despite Boldt alleging that it had completed or partially completed many turbines, Black & Veatch was accused of failing to settle a final invoice for the work. In contrast, Black & Veatch blamed Boldt for being the primary cause of the project delays, asserting it incurred excessive costs to bring the project back on schedule.
Black & Veatch’s lawsuit initially sought $29.4 million in damages, a figure that represented its expenses to finalize the project after accounting for Boldt’s contract value and additional overhead costs. In her reflection, Judge Wood remarked that the jury’s decision to award nominal damages implied Black & Veatch did not adequately demonstrate its actual costs related to Boldt’s part of the project to a reasonable degree of certainty.
This case reflects ongoing tensions in the construction industry regarding accountability and financial outcomes. The appeal process will now determine the next steps for both parties involved in this contentious legal battle.
This article was automatically generated by OpenAI. The people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate, and any article can be requested to be removed, retracted, or corrected by writing an email to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.