Opinion ID: 47515
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: issues

Text: Eby challenges the district court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law by raising the following issues on appeal: whether it was proper for the district court to limit its evaluation of Eby’s differing site conditions claim to a “Type II” claim analysis; whether the district court properly disregarded the quantity-based payment provisions in the contract in deciding Eby’s quantity claim; whether Eby’s inclusion of possible cost-saving ideas within its bid precluded Eby from asserting contract claims based on differing site conditions or any other inadequacies or defects in the contract documents; whether the district court’s factual determination in support of its conclusion that Eby failed to demonstrate reasonable reliance on the contract documents was clearly erroneous; and whether the district court properly disregarded Florida law, construction industry custom, and public policy in evaluating Eby’s claims. Eby contends that four of these five issues challenge a conclusion of law, rather than a finding of fact, by the district court.