Ohio Valley Associated Builders & Contractors v. Rapier Electric, Inc.
947 N.E.2d 1261
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- ABC is a nonunion contractor association whose members bid on public-improvement contracts.
- Rapier Electric was awarded the electrical base contracts for two Butler County projects: Government Services Center Court Remodel and Board of Elections.
- ABC members bid on various contracts within the same public-improvement projects, but not necessarily the exact electrical contracts Rapier secured.
- ABC filed an administrative prevailing-wage complaint with the Ohio Bureau of Wage and Hour; after 60 days without a final determination, ABC filed in common pleas under R.C. 4115.16(B).
- Rapier moved for summary judgment arguing ABC lacked standing as an interested party because no member bid directly against Rapier for the specific electrical contracts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Do ABC have standing as an interested party under R.C. 4115.03(F)? | ABC has standing under 4115.03(F)(4) because it is an association whose members bid for public improvements. | Standing requires a bid directly on the contract from which the violation stems (4115.03(F)(1)). | Yes; ABC has standing. |
| Should standing be limited by a directly competitive bid on the exact contract? | Broad interpretation under 4115.03(F) should allow standing through association membership, not require a direct bid on the exact contract. | Statute should be interpreted narrowly to require a directly competitive bid on the same contract. | Trial court erred; ABC has standing under a broad interpretation. |
Key Cases Cited
- Industrial Power Sys. v. Ohio Valley Associated Builders & Contrs., Inc., 190 Ohio App.3d 273 (2010-Ohio-4930) (broadly recognizes standing of a associations on behalf of members who bid for public improvements)
- Sunesis Constr. Co. v. International Union of Operating Eng'rs, Local 372, 183 Ohio App.3d 438 (2009-Ohio-3729) (reiterates broad interpretation of interested-party standing)
- Bergman v. Monarch Constr. Co., 124 Ohio St.3d 534 (2010-Ohio-622) (prevailing-wage law aims to protect employee wages and project integrity)
- Evans v. Moore, 69 Ohio St.2d 88 (1982) (statutory interpretation guiding non-technical construction of statutes)
- Barberton City Sch. Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. North Ohio Chapter of Associated Builders & Contrs., Inc., 188 Ohio App.3d 395 (2010-Ohio-1826) (discusses interplay of common-law and statutory standing in two-part tests)
- Sunesis Constr. Co. v. Indus. Power Sys. Corp., 2009-Ohio-3729 (Ohio) (reaffirms broad construction of interested-party standing)