Olander Contracting Co., Plaintiff, Appellee and Cross-Appellant v. Gail Wachter Investments, Defendant, Appellee…

Summary

The court affirmed the judgment awarding Olander compensation for unforeseen extra work performed to complete a sewer project and rejecting Bismarck's contract, indemnity, negligence, and new-trial challenges. It held the contract was ambiguous regarding the meaning of extra work and responsibility for payment, so extrinsic evidence and jury determinations were proper, and it construed the indemnity provisions as applying only to third-party claims. The court also held that prompt-payment interest may accrue after a dispute is resolved in favor of the business, including through a judgment. Chief Justice Vande Walle concurred specially, expressing concern about the sua sponte dismissal of negligence claims and the lack of more explicit workmanship instructions, but agreeing the record did not establish reversible prejudice.