Articles Posted in Government Contracts

by
The Supreme Court affirmed the circuit court’s denial of a motion for a new trial based on insufficient evidence filed by the South Dakota Department of Transportation (DOT), holding that the jury’s verdict was not unsupported by any valid legal theory or evidence. DOT was sued by Reede Construction, Inc., which entered into a contract with DOT to perform highway construction work in Sioux Falls. DOT refused to issue a letter of acceptance after requesting several repairs, many of which Reede failed to perform. After Reede left the job and demanded payment for the repairs it had completed, Reede sued, and DOT counterclaimed. The jury returned a verdict awarding no damages to either party. The circuit court denied DOT’s motion for a new trial. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that sufficient evidence supported the jury’s verdict. View "Reede Construction, Inc. v. South Dakota Department of Transportation" on Justia Law

by
The City of Hot Springs published a request for competitive proposals from private entities for utilization of real property owned by the City. Both Pete Lien & Sons, Inc. (“Lien”) and Croell Redi-Mix (“Croell”) submitted proposals. The City accepted Lien’s proposal, and a final contract was negotiated. Croell subsequently commenced this action seeking declaratory and injunctive relief to require the City to reject all proposals and restart the process, contending that the contract involved the procurement of services and that the City had not followed the services procurement requirements of S.D. Codified Laws 5-18A-6 and 5-18A-7. Lien argued that the contract was for the lease of real property, and therefore, the service procurement statutes did not apply. The circuit court granted summary judgment to Lien and the City. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the City’s contract with Lien involved the lease of the City’s property rather than the procurement of services, and because the City followed the statutory leasing procedures, summary judgment was properly granted. View "Lowe v. City of Hot Springs" on Justia Law

by
Two unions filed grievances against the Sioux Falls School District, alleging that that the District violated the parties' labor agreements when the District provided 2.5 percent wage increases for the 2008-2009 school year. The District and the Department of Labor denied both grievances as untimely. The circuit court judge concluded that the grievances were timely, and reversed and remanded the matter to the Department to determine the correct percentage wage increase. On remand, the Department concluded that the union members were entitled to a three percent wage increase. The circuit court affirmed. The District appealed. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the union's grievances were timely; and (2) the union members were entitled to a three percent salary increase, and the District violated the terms of the agreements by implementing a percentage wage increase other than the percentage change in the per student allocation referenced in S.D. Codified Laws 13-13-10.1(4). View "AFSCME Local 1025 v. Sioux Falls Sch. Dist." on Justia Law