Woodrock v. McKenzie Cty., 948 N.W.2d 20

Woodrock, Inc. sued McKenzie County after it supplied aggregate to Edwards Gravel for two county aggregate stockpiles and Edwards Gravel failed to pay Woodrock.
County had solicited bids for 100,000 tons of Class 13 Modified aggregate (two sites); Edwards Gravel’s bid was $1,435,750; County paid Edwards Gravel in full but did not require a payment bond.
Woodrock claimed the County violated N.D.C.C. § 48-01.2-10 by failing to obtain a payment bond and asserted negligence and statutory-based claims for $298,629.54.
The County moved for summary judgment arguing the stockpile contract was not a "public improvement," the bond statute did not apply, no private cause of action exists, and the County owed no duty to Woodrock.
The district court granted summary judgment for the County, concluding supplying aggregate to general stockpiles for road maintenance is not the “construction of a public improvement” and the statutory bond requirement did not apply.
The Supreme Court of North Dakota affirmed, holding stockpiling aggregate for general road maintenance use is not a public improvement and the bond statute therefore did not require a bond.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the aggregate‑stockpile project is a "public improvement" under ch. 48‑01.2	Stockpiling aggregate for county road repair is a public improvement	Stockpiling for general future road maintenance is not an "improvement" and county road maintenance is excluded	Not a public improvement; statute inapplicable
Whether N.D.C.C. § 48‑01.2‑10 required the County to obtain a payment bond	County was required to take a bond before work > $150,000; failure violated the statute	Statute applies only to construction of public improvements; here it does not apply	Statute did not apply, so no bond was required
Whether County is liable for negligence/failing to obtain a bond	County negligently failed to secure statutory protection for suppliers	County owed no legal duty to Woodrock absent a statutory requirement	Summary judgment for County; negligence claim fails because statutory duty did not exist

Wachter Dev., Inc. v. Martin, 931 N.W.2d 698 (N.D. 2019) (summary judgment and statutory‑interpretation standards)
Bellemare v. Gateway Builders, Inc., 420 N.W.2d 733 (N.D. 1988) (definition of "improvement" for real property context)
Rogers v. Nez Perce County, 364 P.2d 1049 (Idaho 1961) (no bond required for delivery/stockpiling of gravel to county stockpiles)
Knuth v. Fid. & Cas. Co. of N.Y., 83 N.W.2d 126 (Wis. 1957) (contract to furnish sand/gravel is not a contract for a public improvement)
Pete Lien & Sons, Inc. v. City of Pierre, 577 N.W.2d 330 (S.D. 1998) (gravel stockpile for general road maintenance not an "improvement")