Class 4 outlines

Professional liability

Continued from last week

• Third-party claims: growing circle of claimants (267)
  • Contract beneficiary or tort duty?
    • Del Guzzi v. Global NW, 105 Wn. 2d 878 (1986)
    • Seattle-Western v. Mowat, 110 Wn. 2d 1 (1988)
    • Burg v. Shannon & Wilson (2002)
  • Negligent misrepresentation
    • Ossining v. Anderson (270)
      539 N.E.2d 91 (1989)
    • ESCA v. KPMG, 135 Wn. 2d 820 (1998)
    • Baddeley v. Seek, 138 Wn. App. 333 (2007)
    • Ramos v. Arnold, 141 Wn. App. 11 (2007)
  • Economic loss rule
    • Berschauer/Phillips v. Seattle S.D. (1994)
    • Carlson v. Sharp, 99 Wn. App. 324 (1999)
    • Alejandre v. Bull, 159 Wn. 2d 674 (2007)
    • Stieneke v. Russi, 145 Wn. App. 544 (2008)
    • Carlile v. Harbour Homes, 147 Wn. App. 193 (2008)
    • Cox v. O’Brien, 150 Wn. App. 24 (2009)
  • Advisor’s privilege: interference with contract
  • Safety: duty replacing privity
    • Loyland v. Stone & Webster, 9 Wn. App. 682 (1973)
    • Riggins v. Bechtel (1986)
    • Pfenninger v. Hunterdon (280)
      770 A.2d 1126 (2001)
    • CH2M Hill v. Herman (285)
      192 F.3d 711 (1999)
    • Reduced designers’ exposure: RCW 51.24.035 (L 87)
      • Emergency scene services: RCW 38.52.1951 (L 93)
• Defenses: client approval rarely works
  • Statutes of repose, limitation: completion v. discovery
  • Quasi-judicial immunity: good faith, finality
• Remedies: apportionment
• Current controversies
  • Professional standard
  • Duty to workers
  • Tort law influence
  • Expanded liability effects

Risk management

• Bargaining power
  • Evaluating client and project
• Contractual control
  • Scope of services
  • Performance standard
  • Consequential damage exclusion
  • Liability limitation
  • Decision-making immunity
  • Statute of limitations
  • Third-party claims
  • Dispute resolution
• Indemnity
  • Risk shifting or sharing
• Professional liability insurance
  • CNA DPIC VOS
  • Risk spreading
    • Risk retention groups: RCW 48.92 (L 87, 93, 08)
  • Not public liability insurance
  • Required, recommended, or useless?
  • Occurrence v. claims-made policies
  • Coverage and exclusions
    • McMahan & Baker v. CNA (1993)
  • Deductibles
  • Policy limits
  • Notice of claim
  • Duty to defend
  • Settlement
  • Termination

Competitive bidding

• Competitive bidding: advantages, disadvantages
  • AGC v. King County (1994)
  • New county public works bid procedures: RCW 36.32.235 (L 96)
  • NECA v. Riveland, 138 Wn. 2d 9 (1999)
  • SSB 5185 (L 99): revise DOT’s bid threshold [ report]
  • SHB 1515 (L 01): increase higher ed bid thresholds [ report]
  • SSB 5733 (L 01): increase counties’ road bid thresholds [ report]
  • HB 2527 (L 02): peg cities’ bid thresholds to inflation [ report]
  • SB 6283 (L 02): increase hospital districts’ bid threshold [ report]
  • HB 2183 (L 03): increase water-sewer districts’ bid threshold [ report]
  • ESSB 5770 (L 07): increase higher ed bid thresholds [ report]
  • 2SHB 3274 (L 08): port districts after POS performance audit [ report]
    

    “Nearly $100 million wasted by Port, state says” The Seattle Times (21 Dec 07)

    “Lawmakers vow to rein in port” Seattle Post-Intelligencer (9 Jan 08)

    Opinion: “Port forgets it’s a public agency” Seattle Post-Intelligencer (7 Feb 08)

    “Chummy culture at port costs taxpayers” Seattle Post-Intelligencer (2 Mar 08)

  • ESHB 1847 (L 09): increase multiple agencies’ thresholds [ report]
• Competitive bidding process
  • Invitation and information to bidders
    • HB 1580 (1999): prequalify contractors
  • Bid proposals, opening, evaluation
    • ESHB 1569 (2004): exclude confidential bidder info [ report]
      

      Editorial: “Off-target attempt to limit open records” The Seattle Times (9 Apr 03)

    • Lowest responsible bidder
      • UW Allen Library
        

        “Rejected bidder clobbers Dept. of Ecology in court” Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce (6 Oct 99)

        Opinion: “Keep politics out of bidding process” Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce (1 Apr 02)

        “County awards 911 center to W.G. Clark” Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce (12 Apr 02)

      • HB 1343 (2001): require “affirmative determination”
      • HB 1918 (2001): require compliance with labor, other laws
      • ESSB 6528 (2002): require “affirmative determination” [ report]
      • HB 2024 (2005): adopt purchasing criteria
      • SHB 2010 (L 07): establishes criteria [ report]
        • RCW 39.04.350
  • Notification to bidders
    • ESHB 2056 (L 03): two business days to protest [ report]
      • RCW 39.04.105
  • Post-award changes: RCW 39.04.015 (L 89) for state agencies
    • SB 5398 (2009): extend to municipalities [ report]
  • Formal contract
  • Readvertising
  • Alternative procedures: RCW 39.10 (L 94 ... 07) generally; background
    • Small works roster: RCW 39.04.155 (L 91 ... 09)
      • ESSB 6347 (L 00): consolidate roster [ report]
      • HB 1548 (L 01): add metro park districts [ report]
      • SB 5063 (L 01): limited public works [ report]
      • SHB 1328 (L 07): encourage small businesses [ report]
      • HB 1196 (L 09): max raised $200K $300K [ report]
    • Building engineering systems: RCW 39.04.290 (L 01)
      • SB 5061 [ report]
    • General contractor/construction manager (GCCM)
      • DOC until 1997: RCW 39.04.220 (L 91, 94, 96)
      • GA, UW, WSU, etc. until 1 July 07: RCW 39.10.061 * (L 94 ... 07)
      • HB 2535 (L 00): early subs’ retainage release [ report]
      • HB 2536 (L 00): GCCM self-perform ‹ 30% [ report]
      • SHB 3124 (2004): tunnel GCCM self-perform › 30% [ report]
      • Overhauled, extended to 1 July 13: RCW 39.10.340 † (L 07)
    • Design/build (DB)
      • GA, UW, WSU, etc. until 1 July 07: RCW 39.10.051 * (L 94 ... 07)
        • Benaroya Hall (Seattle Symphony, LMN, Skanska)
        • SPU: Tolt River DBO (CDM/Philip JV, Dillingham), Cedar DBO (CH2M Hill)
        • UW CPO: Benjamin DBOM (Collins Woerman, Mortenson, Johnson Controls)
        • Seattle Monorail Project DBOM
          

          “Monorail contract talks at issue” Seattle Post-Intelligencer (1 Apr 05)

          “Guaranteed monorail proposal submitted” The Seattle Times (7 Apr 05)

          “Monorail agency officially dissolves; cost taxpayers $125 million” Seattle Post-Intelligencer (18 Jan 08)

        • Overhauled, extended to 1 July 13: RCW 39.10.300 † (L 07)
        • HB 2780 (2008): add DB demonstration projects [ report]
      • DOT projects: SSB 6439 (L 98) demonstration [ report]
        • SHB 1680 (L 01): extend DOT authority [ report]
          • Until 30 Apr 08 ‡: RCW 47.20.780
            

            “State chooses the fast lane” Seattle Post-Intelligencer (14 May 01)

        • HB 2874 (L 06): adds five $2-$10 million pilots [ report]
        • ‡ SB 5798 (L 07): removes sunset [ report]
    • SHB 1425 (L 97): renew, improve GCCM, DB [ report]
    • HB 1070 (L 00): K-12 demonstration projects [ report]
      • Until 1 July 07: RCW 39.10.115 *
    • ESSB 5060 (L 01): renew, expand GCCM, DB [ report]
    • SSB 6597 (L 02): restore $10 million threshold; more K-12 projects [ report]
    • SHB 1788 (L 03): job order contracting (JOC); more K-12 GCCM projects [ report]
      • JOC until 1 July 07: RCW 39.10.130 *
      • SPI: 27 approved K-12 GCCM projects (thru Dec 06)
      • SSB 5250 (2005): increase GA JOCs [ report]
      • JOC extended to 1 July 13: RCW 39.10.420 † (L 07)
    • ESHB 2056 (L 03): add public hospital districts to GCCM, DB [ report]
      • Until 1 July 07: RCW 39.10.117 *
    • SSB 5520 (L 03): add ferry terminals to GCCM, DB [ report]
    • ESHB 1830 (L 05): capital projects review board (CPARB) [ report]
    • SHB 3024 (L 06): more K-12 GCCM projects [ report]
    • * 2SHB 1506 (L 07): major 39.10 overhaul; extend to 1 July 13 [ report]
    • † HB 1197 (L 09): GCCM, DB, DBOM, JOC changes [ report]
    • SSB 5760 as amended (2009): UW, WSU special procedures [ report]
  • Public policy through procurement: RCW 39 (... L 23 ... 09) generally
    • Prevailing wages: RCW 39.12 (L 45 ... 09) generally
      • Off-site fabricators
        • Everett v. L&I, 109 Wn. 2d 819 (1988)
        • EHB 1836 (2009) defeated in Senate [ report]
      • Facilities leased 50% by state: RCW 39.04.260 (L 93)
      • Contract maintenance
        • Spokane v. L&I, 100 Wn. App. 805 (2000)
      • ESHB 2304 (L 02): transportation projects [ report]
      • Supporters v. Moore, 119 Wn. App. 352 (2003)
      • SB 5903 (L 09): residential construction [ report]
      • SSB 5904 (L 09): independent contractor [ report]
    • Public art: RCW 43.46.090 (L 74, 83), RCW 43.17.200 (L 74, 83, 05)
      • HB 2317 (2000): eliminate 0.5% for art
      • HB 1376 (2009): suspend for 09-11 biennium [ analysis]
    • M/WBE set-asides: RCW 39.19 (L 83 ...) generally
      • Statewide certification: RCW 39.19.120 (L 87)
      • Initiative 200 passed on 1998 ballot
      • Codified as RCW 49.60.400,.401 (L 99)
      • EHB 1087 (L 09): improve OMWBE [ report]
    • Subcontractor listing: RCW 39.30.060 (L 93 ... 02)
      • HB 1766 (L 99): HVAC/plumbing/electrical [ report]
      • SB 6577 (L 02): reaction to McCandlish [ report]
        

        “New ‘bid shopping’ law no magic bullet for subs” Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce (10 May 02)

      • HB 2372 (2004): publicly bid on jobs › $10 million
      • SB 6667 (2004): sub list read at bid time [ report]
      • SSB 5969 (2009): clarify substitutions? [ report]
    • Apprentice utilization: RCW 39.04.320 (L 2005, 06, 07)
      • SSB 5491 (1999) [ report]
      • Gov. Locke’s Executive Order 00-01 (2000)
      • 2SHB 2630 (2002), 2SHB 1065 (2003), SHB 2439 (2004)
      • SSB 5097 (L 05) [ report]
      • EHB 1898 (L 07): extends to K-12 projects [ report]
      • ESSB 5873 (L 09): extends to higher ed projects [ report]
    • HB 2440 (2006): report offshore items
    • HB 1195 (L 09): pay undisputed claims [ report]
    • HB 1716 (2009): pay employees “living wage” [ report]
• Competitive bidding: legal aspects
  • Invitation to bidders: request for offers
  • Duty to disclose
  • Bid proposal: offer
  • Contract award: acceptance
    • Right to reject bids
      • Goss v. State (1895)
      • Conduit v. Metropolitan (394)
        485 N.E.2d 1005 (1985)
      • SB 6669 (2004): only for “good cause” [ report]
      • HB 1444 (2005): only for “good cause”
      • HB 1292 (2005): compensate low bidder
      • SSB 6509 (2006): only for “compelling reason” [ report]
    • Material variance: non-responsive bid
      • Farmer v. State (1983)
        • WA digital signature law: RCW 19.34 (L 96)
          

          “State receives a bid over the Net” Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce (1 July 98)

          “A lesson in electronic bidding” Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce (12 Feb 99)

      • Land v. Snohomish (1985)
      • UW Hospital Addition, Physics/Astronomy
      • Quinn v. KCFPD 26, 111 Wn. App. 19 (2002)
  • Mistaken bid withdrawal
    • Peter Kiewit v. DOT (1981)
    • Sulzer Bingham v. Lockheed (403)
      947 F.2d 1362 (1991)
    • UW Meany recladding, EECSE (Kiewit), Mary Gates (Hoffman)
    • Harborview remodel/addition: Mortenson went ahead
      • Mortenson v. Timberline, 140 Wn. 2d 568 (2000)
        

        “Mortenson loses suit over $2M mistake” Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce (17 May 00)

    • Disqualified from rebidding
      • Cities and towns (e.g.): RCW 35.22.635 (L 96)
      • ESHB 2056 (L 03): broaden to all public works [ report]
        • RCW 39.04.107
    • Bid reformation
      • Welcome v. State (1972)
  • Bid deposit or bond: liquidated damages: total (not penalty)
    • Security deposit: difference
  • Formal contract
  • Bid documents
  • Judicial review
    • Peerless v. State, 119 Wn. 2d 584 (1992)
    • Dick v. King County (1996)
    • BBG v. Monroe, 96 Wn. App. 517 (1999)
    • Hadaller v. Port of Chehalis, 97 Wn. App. 750 (1999)
    • McCandlish v. Will (2001)
  • Illegal contract recovery