NJ Superior Court Upholds MCA Of NJ Challenge
The Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court recently upheld MCA of New Jersey’s challenge to the contracting practices of the New Jersey School Construction Corporation (SCC) (Alan O’Shea and the MCA of New Jersey v. New Jersey Schools Construction Corp., NJ Superior Court App. Div, No. A-5459-04T1, 10/19/2006).
The Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court recently upheld MCA of New Jersey’s challenge to the contracting practices of the New Jersey School Construction Corporation (SCC) (Alan O’Shea and the MCA of New Jersey v. New Jersey Schools Construction Corp., NJ Superior Court App. Div, No. A-5459-04T1, 10/19/2006).
The SCC had allowed substitutions of named major trade subcontractors after bids were submitted on its school construction program under a vague and discretionary policy. MCA of New Jersey challenged the policy under the state’s general procurement law, which requires that prime contractors name major trade subcontractors in their bids and prohibits post-bid substitutions. The appellate decision held that the association did have standing to sue, had actual rights to be vindicated in the court suit, that the NJ procurement law did not permit the post-bid substitutions, and that the SCC lacked the authority to do so.
The Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court recently upheld MCA of New Jersey’s challenge to the contracting practices of the New Jersey School Construction Corporation (SCC) (Alan O’Shea and the MCA of New Jersey v. New Jersey Schools Construction Corp., NJ Superior Court App. Div, No. A-5459-04T1, 10/19/2006).
The SCC had allowed substitutions of named major trade subcontractors after bids were submitted on its school construction program under a vague and discretionary policy. MCA of New Jersey challenged the policy under the state’s general procurement law, which requires that prime contractors name major trade subcontractors in their bids and prohibits post-bid substitutions. The appellate decision held that the association did have standing to sue, had actual rights to be vindicated in the court suit, that the NJ procurement law did not permit the post-bid substitutions, and that the SCC lacked the authority to do so.
Looking for a reprint of this article?
From high-res PDFs to custom plaques, order your copy today!
