Wood Elec., Inc. v. Ohio Facilities Contr. Comm.
2017 Ohio 2743
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Dalton Local School District contracted to build a K–8 school; OFCC, architect (thendesign), and construction manager (SCG) made up the project team. Wood Electric was the electrical prime contractor; CT Taylor was the general trades contractor responsible for building enclosure.
- Contract milestone dates required temporary and permanent building enclosure; CT Taylor repeatedly missed those enclosure milestones for multiple building areas, causing exposure to weather and "trade stacking." SCG sometimes used a looser definition of "temporary enclosure."
- Wood timely gave notice of delay (Dec 20, 2013), sought extensions to certify a claim, and ultimately certified a claim (Apr 11, 2014) for delay-related increased costs; OFCC denied the claim after relying on SCG/thendesign statements that enclosure had occurred earlier.
- Wood sued OFCC in the Court of Claims; at trial Wood presented a measured-mile analysis and HOOP home-office overhead calculation by expert Timothy Calvey, totaling $254,027. OFCC’s expert criticized methodology but offered no alternative damages computation tied to reliable enclosure dates.
- Court of Claims found OFCC breached by not enforcing milestone deadlines against CT Taylor, found Calvey’s methods reasonably certain (including HOOP), discounted OFCC’s expert (who relied on false enclosure dates), and awarded $254,027. OFCC appealed but filed no formal assignments of error; the appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Complete Gen. (Eichleay prerequisites) required proof of "standby" and inability to take other work before awarding home-office overhead | Wood used ODOT HOOP method (not Eichleay) and contends Complete Gen. does not bar other reasonable formulas | OFCC: Complete Gen. requires proof of Eichleay prima facie elements before any home-office overhead award | Court: Complete Gen/Eichleay prerequisites apply to Eichleay only; HOOP may be used; trial court did not err in applying HOOP (following J&H precedent) |
| Whether Wood was limited to the dollar amount it certified in its Article 8 claim when suing in Court of Claims | Wood: certified claim was submitted under pressure and with incomplete project information; later, after completion, its HOOP computation reflected fuller damages; limiting to certified amount would be inequitable | OFCC: Wood should be bound by its certified claim amount; cannot recover more in Court of Claims than certified during construction | Court: Rejects OFCC’s position; no statute/case requires strict dollar-for-dollar limitation; OFCC denied extension forcing early certification; trial court properly considered fuller damages evidence |
| Whether the trial court improperly shifted burden of proof to OFCC to disprove Wood’s damages | Wood: met its burden with expert proof; OFCC failed to present a competing reliable calculation | OFCC: court shifted burden by accepting Calvey because OFCC offered no alternative computation | Court: No impermissible burden shift; court credited Calvey and noted OFCC’s failure to present a convincing alternative; fact-finder may award damages based on reasonable certainty without mathematical exactness |
| Admissibility/adequacy of damages proof (measured-mile/HOOP methods) | Wood: measured-mile for lost productivity plus HOOP for home-office overhead are industry-accepted and reasonably certain here | OFCC: Calvey’s measured-mile and HOOP application flawed; expert failed to track productivity and should have compared identical tasks; OFCC’s expert challenged methods | Court: Calvey’s methods were reasonable given available data; HOOP appropriate; OFCC’s expert unreliable (relied on false enclosure dates) and offered no usable alternative |
Key Cases Cited
- Complete Gen. Constr. Co. v. Ohio Dept. of Transp., 94 Ohio St.3d 54 (2002) (discusses Eichleay formula and its prima facie elements for awarding unabsorbed home-office overhead)
- West v. All State Boiler, Inc., 146 F.3d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (federal discussion of Eichleay and "standby"/inability to take other work concepts)
- Arbino v. Johnson & Johnson, 116 Ohio St.3d 468 (2007) (factfinder's role in determining damages; exact mathematical certainty not required)
- Geygan v. Queen City Grain Co., 71 Ohio App.3d 185 (12th Dist. 1991) (contract damages must be shown with reasonable certainty)