Summary
The Supreme Court of Missouri held that work performed under a water tank maintenance contract constituted "construction" subject to Missouri's prevailing-wage requirements, rather than exempt "maintenance work." The court concluded that reconstruction, improvements, alterations, painting, and major repairs may fall within the statutory definition of construction even when work does not change a facility's size, type, or extent, and reversed the trial court's judgment.
Holdings
- The contracted work constituted construction under section 290.210(1) and therefore was subject to the Act's prevailing-wage requirements.
- The size-type-extent limitation in the maintenance-work definition cannot be applied to narrow the plain statutory scope of construction; construction may occur on an existing facility without changing its size, type, or extent.
- Summary judgment for Utility Service was improper because the contracted work was construction subject to prevailing-wage requirements.
Questions Presented
- Whether the contracted work on the city's existing water storage tank and tower constituted construction subject to Missouri's Prevailing Wage Act or maintenance work exempt from the Act.
- Whether work may constitute statutory construction even when it does not change or increase the existing facility's size, type, or extent.
- Whether the trial court properly entered summary judgment for Utility Service.
Disposition
reversed
Cases Cited (10)
- ITT Commercial Fin. Corp. v. Mid-Am. Marine Supply Corp., 854 S.W.2d 371, 376, 381-82 (Mo. banc 1993)(followed)
- United Pharm. Co. of Mo., Inc. v. Mo. Bd. of Pharm., 208 S.W.3d 907, 909-10 (Mo. banc 2006)(followed)
- Neske v. City of St. Louis, 218 S.W.3d 417, 424 (Mo. banc 2007)(followed)
- State ex rel. LeFevre v. Stubbs, 642 S.W.2d 103, 106 (Mo. banc 1982)(followed)
- State v. Breckenridge, 219 Mo. App. 587, 282 S.W. 149, 150 (1926)(followed)
- Foremost-McKesson, Inc. v. Davis, 488 S.W.2d 193, 197 (Mo. banc 1972)(followed)
- Purler-Cannon-Schulte, Inc. v. City of St. Charles, 146 S.W.3d 31, 47 (Mo. App. 2004)(followed)
- State Dep't of Labor & Indus. Relations v. Bd. of Pub. Utils. of City of Springfield, 910 S.W.2d 737, 744 (Mo. App. 1995)(distinguished)
- Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Res. Def. Council, 467 U.S. 837, 842-43 (1984)(followed)
- Long v. Interstate Ready-Mix, L.L.C., 83 S.W.3d 571, 574 (Mo. App. 2002)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…