Skip to content
Call Us Today: 303-984-1941

Concrete construction expert witness services on behalf of the District

Holloway Consulting provided concrete construction expert witness services on behalf of the District. The case was in litigation with the General Contractor on the construction of the Wastewater Treatment Facility (“Project”) in a Colorado casino city. Construction work began in 2003 and ended in 2005, many months later than planned.

Plaintiff’s Case

General Contractor argued that numerous actions and inactions by the District and other contractors caused delays to the General Contractor, totaling 106 days on the Project. The General Contractor further argued that various requests for change orders denied by the District should have been granted under the contract terms. The General Contractor sought an award of damages in the aggregate amount of $536,381.00.

Defendant’s Case

The District argued that it was the General Contractor’s poor workmanship, mostly with regard to concrete structures, that caused the General Contractor to be on the Project longer than the General Contractor had planned. The District also argued that the General Contractor’s claims for change orders were not compensable under the contract. These resulted from the General Contractor’s poor work, were not timely submitted, or represented tasks already required of the General Contractor under the terms of its contract.

Persuasive evidence showed that the General Contractor’s poor workmanship with concrete work caused its delays on the project. The testimony of witnesses established that concrete work was the General Contractor’s Achilles heel. Its own poor workmanship and supervision caused numerous serious concrete quality failures on the project.

Defendant’s concrete construction expert witness from The Holloway Consulting Group, LLC also demonstrated that the General Contractor’s poor concrete caused its delays. Holloway’s analysis was supported by photographs, daily logs, letters and notices of defective work issued by the engineer of record

The Court found that the evidence established that the General Contractor’s late completion of its work on the Project was the result of its own shortcomings. In particular, performing in a workmanlike manner in concrete construction of the water tanks. Judgment in favor of the District.