Opinion ID: 146973
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Contractual Background

Text: Plaintiff's contract with Spruce Peak (the Construction Contract) incorporated the documents due from the Design Team as Project Construction Documents. J.A. 2. According to Plaintiff, [c]ontrary to the Construction Contract, the Project Construction Documents were not completed and delivered to Hunt on August 27, 2005. J.A.3. The Construction Contract laid out procedures for dealing with cost overruns. Specifically, the contract required Plaintiff to notify Spruce Peak of any `errors, omissions or discrepancies in the Plans, Specifications or other Contract Documents' so that Plaintiff could seek a remedy from Spruce Peak. J.A. 34, 89. Plaintiff was then entitled to additional compensation, paid by Spruce Peak, for such cost overruns or delays. Plaintiff apparently took advantage of these procedures to increase the Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) of the Construction Contract from just below $80 million to just below $97 million.