Sheldon L. Pollack Corp. v. Falcon Industries, Inc.
794 S.W.2d 380 | Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District | 1990
What This Case Means for Subcontractors
A concrete subcontractor (Falcon) sued a general contractor (Pollack) for unpaid work on a hotel project in Texas. The court ruled that Falcon substantially performed its work and was entitled to recover the full contract price minus the cost to fix defects ($30,000). This case established that payment conditions in subcontracts are about timing, not about whether you have to get paid at all if you do the work.
Key Takeaways
- •If you substantially complete your work, you can recover full payment minus repair costs—even if the owner or GC hasn't paid yet or claims defects exist.
- •Payment clauses like 'pay when paid' don't eliminate your right to payment; they only delay when payment is due. You still get paid if you substantially perform.
- •Document your work completion and any defects the GC claims. The cost to fix those defects will be deducted from your recovery, so dispute inflated repair estimates.
A party that has substantially performed a building contract is entitled to recover the full contract price less the cost of remedying those defects.
Frequently Asked Question
If I substantially complete my work but the general contractor hasn't been paid by the owner, can I still get paid?
Yes. Texas law says if you substantially perform your subcontract work, you're entitled to the full contract price minus the cost to fix any defects. Payment conditions in subcontracts control timing, not whether you get paid. You don't lose your right to payment just because the GC or owner is in financial trouble.
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.
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.
Flameout Design & Fabrication, Inc. v. Pennzoil Caspian Corp.
Summary judgment for defendants was properly granted because Flameout failed to satisfy the statute of frauds for an alleged three-year contract, as the three documents cited did not constitute a signed, enforceable written agreement for the sale of goods.