Mw Builders, Inc. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims | 2018
What This Case Means for Subcontractors
MW Builders, a general contractor, tried to recover money on behalf of its subcontractor Bergelectric by claiming the subcontractor's lien waiver didn't apply to all claims. The federal court rejected this argument, ruling that when a subcontractor signs a clear lien waiver covering a specific time period, it gives up all claims from that period—no exceptions. The court also said it cannot rewrite private contracts between contractors and subcontractors. This means subcontractors need to be extremely careful about what they waive in writing.
Key Takeaways
- •A signed lien waiver with clear language and dates will be enforced as written. Courts will not let contractors argue around it on your behalf.
- •Once you sign a lien waiver releasing claims through a certain date, you cannot later claim you were owed money for work done before that date.
- •The federal court will not fix or reform a bad contract you signed. Review lien waivers carefully before signing and negotiate the terms upfront.
General release bars claims based upon events occurring prior to release date.
Frequently Asked Question
If I sign a lien waiver, can my general contractor claim the money I'm owed on my behalf?
No. Once you sign a clear lien waiver covering a specific time period, you release all claims from that period. The general contractor cannot later sue the government to recover money you waived. The court will enforce the waiver as written and will not rewrite the contract to help you.
Related Cases
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.
Department of the Army v. Blue Fox, Inc.
Sovereign immunity bars subcontractors from enforcing equitable liens against the United States Government, as the APA's waiver of immunity does not extend to claims for money damages.
Weize Co. v. Colorado Regional Construction, Inc.
A general contractor violated Colorado's construction trust fund statute by failing to hold funds in trust for subcontractors and suppliers, and a lien release bond does not exempt contractors from trust fund obligations or excuse failure to record a lis pendens.
Rice v. Pinney
A county court has jurisdiction to determine immediate possession in a forcible detainer action even when a concurrent district court suit challenges title, provided the possession determination does not necessarily require resolving the title dispute.