J. West Construction Co. v. Beeson, Lusk, Jones, Inc.

Richmond County Circuit Court

J. West Construction Co. v. Beeson, Lusk, Jones, Inc.

5 Va. Cir. 50, 1982 Va. Cir. LEXIS 30

CourtRichmond County Circuit Court

DecidedApril 16, 1982

DocketCase No. LE-1095

StatusPublished

This text of 5 Va. Cir. 50 (J. West Construction Co. v. Beeson, Lusk, Jones, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Richmond County Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

J. West Construction Co. v. Beeson, Lusk, Jones, Inc., 5 Va. Cir. 50, 1982 Va. Cir. LEXIS 30 (Va. Super. Ct. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

By JUDGE WILLARD I. WALKER

After considering the pleadings, arguments and memoranda of this case, I hold that defendant’s demurrer be sustained with prejudice.

The plaintiff's motion for judgment fails to state a cause of action on which relief may be granted. Assuming, as I must, that all allegations in plaintiff’s pleadings are true, they fail for the following reasons.

First, there is no duty owed by an architect to a subcontractor, unless a contractual duty exists; and there is no contractual duty alleged in this case. The architect's duty runs to the owner, not to the contractor or subcontractor.

Secondly, a general contractor is not considered a third-party beneficiary of an owner-architect contract, absent specific provisions providing otherwise. This same concept is applicable to a subcontractor who is one step further removed from the owner-architect contract, and therefore bars recovery.

For the above reasons, the demurrer is sustained with prejudice.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI