Tribble & Stephens Co. v. RGM Constructors, L.P.
154 S.W.3d 639 | Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston) | 2005
What This Case Means for Subcontractors
Tribble & Stephens (general contractor) sued RGM (concrete subcontractor) for poor work on an Embassy Suites hotel. The trial court sided with RGM, but the appeals court reversed and sent the case back for trial. The court found real disputes about whether RGM actually met the contract's quality standards and whether the general contractor approved the work. This means subcontractors can't rely on summary judgments to avoid trial when performance quality is genuinely disputed.
Key Takeaways
- •Document all approvals in writing. RGM lost because it couldn't prove the general contractor (Campbell) approved its work—get written sign-offs on completed work before moving forward.
- •Performance standards matter in court. Vague satisfaction clauses create fact disputes that survive summary judgment, so clearly define what 'acceptable' concrete work looks like in your subcontract.
- •Exposed-to-view surfaces get extra scrutiny. Courts care whether concrete is visible to the public; quality standards for visible work are higher and more likely to be disputed at trial.
RGM failed to prove Campbell approved its performance under the subcontract.
Frequently Asked Question
What happens if my general contractor doesn't approve my work in writing?
You could lose at trial even if you think you did good work. Courts will assume the GC's silence or lack of written approval means they didn't accept your performance. Always get written sign-off before final payment and moving to the next phase.
Related Cases
Gall v. United States
Appellate courts must review all sentences under an abuse-of-discretion standard regardless of whether they fall inside or outside the Guidelines range, and cannot require extraordinary circumstances to justify sentences outside the range.
Piotrowski v. City of Houston
Municipal liability under § 1983 requires proof of official policy as the moving force; isolated employee misconduct insufficient, and equal protection claim time-barred.
Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pena
Federal race-based classifications must be analyzed under strict scrutiny regardless of whether they benefit or burden minorities, and the Fifth Amendment's equal protection obligation equals the Fourteenth Amendment's.
Northeastern Florida Chapter of the Associated General Contractors of America v. City of Jacksonville
An association of contractors has standing to challenge a minority set-aside ordinance without proving any member would have won a contract absent the ordinance; the injury is denial of equal competitive opportunity, not loss of a specific contract.
In Re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc.
The Civil Commitment of Sexually Violent Predators Act is civil, not criminal, and does not violate due process even when applied to incompetent defendants.
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.