'Chaotic Workflow': Plaza Construction Accused of Mismanaging Miami's Paraiso Bay Project
Electrical subcontractor Dynalectric Co. says it's owed more than $1.9 million for extra work it had to do because of multiple design changes to the Edgewater condominium tower.
December 06, 2018 at 02:23 PM
4 minute read
The Paraiso Bay electrical subcontractor says it's owed more than $1.9 million for its work on the condominium tower after Plaza Construction allegedly mismanaged the project and didn't allot additional time for extra work arising from design changes.
Dynalectric Co., a subsidiary of Connecticut-based infrastructure company EMCOR Group Inc., was hired through a $5.3 million contract with New York-based general contractor Plaza Construction in 2014 for electrical work on the now-finished 53-story building that's part of the four-tower Paraiso complex in Miami's trendy Edgewater.
“Plaza's failure to extend the contract time for the project delays and impacts placed unrelenting pressure on Dynalectric to meet unrealistic and artificial completion dates. … Dynalectric was forced to work extensive overtime and to increase its manpower to levels not anticipated of foreseen by Dynalectric when the contract was awarded,” Dynalectric says in its Nov. 14 lawsuit against Plaza.
Plaza President Brad Meltzer said his firm will defend itself.
“Plaza Construction has meritorious defenses and cannot comment further on this pending litigation,” he said in part in an emailed statement.
Dynalectric's attorney, R. Steven Holt of Katz Barron in Fort Lauderdale, didn't return a request for comment.
Plaza isn't entirely to blame for the design changes, as many likely came from the developer and architect, Dyanalectric said in its Miami-Dade Circuit Court complaint. But the company said Plaza didn't give extra time to finish the work, didn't properly respond to requests for work changes Dynalectric turned in and mismanaged the project by giving directions orally to control the work instead of using the proper scheduling system.
“The result was a chaotic workflow,” according to the complaint.
Plaza issued 13 major project design changes, most of which affected electrical work, and Dynalectric made more than 250 change orders, which are requests for extra payment or more time that the general contractor submits to the developer. Dynalectric says its contract required Plaza to review these change orders as soon as it gets them and to reply promptly. Yet, Dynalectric says, some of the change orders still are pending.
Plaza “demanded direct cost concessions that were unfair and unwarranted as a condition to funding any costs at all. … Plaza effectively held Dynalectric hostage, withholding funding for long periods and demanding arbitrary price reductions,” according to the complaint.
Aside from how Plaza managed the project, Dynalectric also is taking issue with how Plaza represented things versus the reality. Plaza held out the prospect that Dynalectric would be treated fairly and that there would be a “fair resolution of the impact and inefficiency costs caused by the changes and the mismanagement by Plaza. At the same time, according to the complaint, Plaza's contract with the developer spelled out a delays payment recourse for Plaza — but none for subcontractors like Dynalectric.
Plaza also had levied similar accusations against the developer. On Aug. 24, 2017, it sued site owner PRH NE 31st Street LLC, an affiliate of Paraiso complex developer, Miami-based The Related Group, seeking to get paid for the extra work it had to do stemming from the many design changes. PRH NE 31st Street denied the claims and counter-sued alleging Plaza had a $115 million guaranteed maximum price for the contract that could be increased only under certain conditions. It also in part accused Plaza of not finishing the project on time, meaning Plaza owes liquidated damages; not hiring a competent project manager and adequately skilled staff; and not meeting contract and governmental construction requirements, including the Florida Building Code.
The suit was dismissed Feb. 27, 2018, after Plaza and PRH NE reached a settlement, which remains sealed.
Dynalectric claims it should have been included in the settlement but instead was kept in the dark, contrary to both its contract and standard practice.
Dynalectric says some of the changes that made for extra work on the building at 650 NE 31st St. included numerous late design changes to electrical and fire alarm systems; foundation work-related and pool deck lighting design delays; and late, incomplete and defective electrical and fire alarm designs.
Dynalectric argues that its understanding when it signed on for the job was that project designs were finished.
The claims include breach of contract and breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing counts, as well as a quantum meruit count seeking Plaza to pay for Dynalectric's extra work.
Related stories:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All830 Brickell is Open After Two-Year Delay That Led to Winston & Strawn Pulling Lease
3 minute readMiami Lawyers Beat Other Local Sectors, Attorneys Elsewhere in Office Usage
3 minute read'Would've Been Snoring Without Ya': Fort Lauderdale Jury Awards $4.5 Million in Condo Investment Spat
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250