AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• In early 2008, Albuquerque Public Schools contracted with RVC for improvements at Eldorado High School. RVC subcontracted Rock Scapes for concrete work at a price of $303,985.76. Rock Scapes was to submit monthly statements of work performed, with RVC agreeing to pay 95% upon approval and receipt of funds from APS, retaining 5% until final completion. Before completing the work, RVC terminated the subcontract with Rock Scapes, using its employees and another subcontractor to finish the work, and withheld further payments from Rock Scapes, pending determination of RVC's damages and costs to complete the project (paras 2-5).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff/Counterdefendant-Appellee (Rock Scapes): Argued that RVC breached the subcontract by failing to make payments for completed work and sought compensatory and punitive damages for RVC's termination of the subcontract with the motive to hire another subcontractor at a lower cost (paras 6-7).
• Defendant/Counterplaintiff-Appellant (RVC): Counterclaimed for breach of contract and statutory violations, arguing that payments were withheld pending determination of RVC's damages and costs to complete the project. Contested the Interest Penalty Motion by arguing that under the PPA, a general contractor does not owe an interest penalty unless the amount due is undisputed and the contractor has received payment for that amount from the owner (paras 5, 9).

Legal Issues

• Whether RVC violated the Prompt Payment Act (PPA) by failing to pay Rock Scapes for completed work within the stipulated time frame.
• Whether Rock Scapes is entitled to an interest penalty under the PPA, pre- and post-judgment interest, and attorney fees.

Disposition

• The district court's award of a PPA interest penalty on certain amounts was affirmed in part and reversed in part.
• The pre-judgment interest award under Sections 56-8-3(A) and -4(B) was affirmed.
• The attorney fee award was vacated and remanded for further proceedings.

Reasons

• The Court of Appeals found that a portion of the PPA interest penalty award was supported by substantial evidence, specifically for amounts that RVC received from APS and failed to pay Rock Scapes within seven days. However, it reversed the award for amounts not supported by evidence, including certain change orders and the full claim for payment for interior concrete work. The court affirmed the pre-judgment interest award, finding no abuse of discretion by the district court in its determination. The attorney fee award was vacated due to failure to segregate fees between the PPA claim and other claims, and the matter was remanded for reconsideration of attorney fees under the PPA and potentially under the subcontract's provisions (paras 21-49).