Fairfax County Redevelopment and Housing Authority v. Worcester Brothers Co.
Virginia Supreme Court
257 Va. 382 (1999)

- Written by Josh Lee, JD
Facts
The Fairfax County Redevelopment and Housing Authority (defendant) awarded a construction contract to Worcester Brothers Co. (plaintiff) in 1995. Under the contract, the project should have been substantially complete by mid-February 1996. However, the housing authority failed to obtain necessary clearances for a significant portion of the work, causing a substantial delay. Worcester Brothers sued the housing authority, seeking to recover damages incurred as a result of the delay. Worcester Brothers submitted evidence of incurring over $46,000 in direct expenses based on the delay, and Worcester Brothers sought recovery of a portion of its overhead expenses, also called home-office expenses. Although Worcester Brothers did not specifically allocate overhead expenses to each construction project in its accounting system, Worcester Brothers requested over $34,000 in overhead expenses, based on the Eichleay formula. The Eichleay formula provides a reasonable approximation of overhead expenses attributable to a construction project by averaging those expenses out. The trial court agreed and awarded the requested damages to Worcester Brothers. The housing authority appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Koontz, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 830,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.