Court Opinion

ID: 9663013
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 23:25:51.334779+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:14:44.802360
License: Public Domain

WOLLMAN, Justice
(dissenting).
As the majority opinion makes abundantly clear, Arcon sought recovery in the Cement Plant case for the liquidated damages assessed by Department for failure to complete the construction contract on time and also for increased freight rates and fuel surcharges. Arcon was awarded nothing on the liquidated damages claim and only $38,173.00 on the increased freight rates and fuel surcharges claim. Arcon did not file a notice of review with respect to those issues. Accordingly, however infeli-citously worded the dispositive paragraph in our opinion in the Cement Plant case may have been, 349 N.W.2d 407, 417, the fact remains that we could not have reversed the judgment with respect to those two issues. Accordingly, I would hold that Arcon was precluded by the judgment in the Cement Plant case from relitigating the issues in the case at bar and would reverse the judgment appealed from.
I am authorized to state that Justice MORGAN joins in this dissent.