Addicks Services, Inc. v. GGP-Bridgeland, LP, et a
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit | 2010
What This Case Means for Subcontractors
Addicks Services performed excavation work for a residential development and signed monthly lien waivers to get paid. Later, Addicks tried to sue for extra work and delay costs. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the monthly waivers permanently blocked all claims for extra work and delays up to the date each waiver was signed. This means once you sign a lien waiver, you lose the right to sue for those issues.
Key Takeaways
- •Never sign a lien waiver that covers more work or time than you've actually been paid for—read it carefully and make sure the dates and scope match what you've completed
- •Monthly waivers are binding and final; courts will enforce them even if you later discover you're owed money for extra work or delays during that period
- •Document all extra work and change orders in writing before signing any waiver, and only waive claims you've actually resolved or been fully compensated for
Interim Waivers unambiguously released all claims for extra work and delay damages.
Frequently Asked Question
If I sign a monthly lien waiver, can I still sue later for extra work I did that month?
No. Once you sign a lien waiver, courts will enforce it as a complete release of all claims for extra work and delays through that waiver date. You cannot sue later for those issues. Always negotiate and document extra work separately before signing any waiver, and only waive claims you've been fully paid for.
Related Cases
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission v. IT-Davy
Sovereign immunity bars a contractor's breach-of-contract suit against a state agency absent express legislative consent; neither the agency's conduct, contract terms, nor general statutes waive immunity from suit.
Martin K. Eby Construction Company, Inc. v. Dallas Area Rapid Transit
A contractor must exhaust administrative remedies established by a regional transportation authority before pursuing breach of contract claims in court, even when the authority lacks governmental immunity from suit.
Edwin P. Harrison, and United States of America, Party in Interest v. Westinghouse Savannah River Company
The Fourth Circuit reversed the district court's dismissal, holding that the False Claims Act broadly reaches false statements made to obtain government contract approval, not just false payment claims themselves.
Green International, Inc. v. Solis
No-damages-for-delay clauses in construction contracts need not meet the conspicuousness requirement established in Dresser for exculpatory negligence clauses, and such clauses are enforceable to bar delay damages absent specific exceptions.
Italian Cowboy Partners, Ltd. v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America
A standard merger clause without clear and unequivocal language expressly disclaiming reliance does not bar a fraud claim, even in a commercial lease agreement between parties.
Heldenfels Bros. v. City of Corpus Christi
A municipality owes no duty to a subcontractor to ensure a general contractor provides valid payment bonds, and a subcontractor cannot recover from the municipality under quantum meruit, unjust enrichment, or negligence theories when the general contractor abandons the project.