In This Issue:

- Beware of penny bidding: Contractors could be stuck footing the bill for differing site conditions

- Pennsylvania Supreme Court weighs whether good faith refusal to pay is a factor in awarding attorneys’ fees under state Contractor and Subcontractor Payment Act

- Washington, D.C.’s new P3 law paves the way for new public-private partnerships in the District

- Appeal of arbitrator’s determination in county construction contract disputes in Maryland limited to judicial review

- Excerpt from Beware of penny bidding: Contractors could be stuck footing the bill for differing site conditions:

Bid a penny per unit and you may be stuck, despite differing site conditions. A Massachusetts Appeals Court ruled in March 2015 that a contractor who submitted a penny per cubic yard to excavate rock is stuck with its bid price, despite encountering 250 percent of the expected rock stated in the bidding documents and a Massachusetts statute that permits for an equitable adjustment for differing subsurface or latent site conditions. See Celco Const. Corp. v. Town of Avon, - N.E.3d - (2015), 2014 WL 7928217.