Knoch, architect argue over contract dispute
The Knoch School District and Foreman Architects Engineers, Inc., of Zelienople, were in Common Pleas Court Wednesday, July 30, presenting arguments over whether the district was required — under a 2008 contract — to use Foreman for the ongoing $39 million high school renovation project.
The district and Foreman each have filed motions seeking judgments, and attorneys for both sides presented arguments in court supporting their opposing positions.
District solicitor Tom Breth said an Aug. 26, 2008, contract between the parties was related to a high school renovation project, but the school board voted to suspend the project due to an economic downturn at the time.
The contract includes references to other projects, including a roof replacement project at the middle school, a conceptual master plan study, a parking lot project and new maintenance building. Foreman submitted invoices for all of the projects and the district paid the invoices, Breth said. The final payment was made Nov. 18, 2011.
“This was the last time the parties used the contract,” Breth said.
He argued a four-year statute of limitations for Foreman to file claims against the district relating to the contract began after the 2011 payment was made.
“As of Nov. 18, 2011, the clock started to run,” Breth said.
Foreman’s attorney Matthew Hoffman the contract allows the district to terminate the contract without cause by providing written notice to Foreman, but Foreman is then entitled to a remedy including payment for projects that were not completed.
In 2020, the board decided to proceed with a high school renovation project, Hoffman said.
Hoffman argued that the 2008 contract does not have an expiration date. The first time district said the contract expired was in a letter Breth send to Foreman in February 2020. Breth sent Foreman a letter in 2022 saying the district hired a different architect for the high school project, he said.
He said Foreman is entitled to termination costs that include profits the firm would have made if it had worked on the high school renovation project.
The amount of money Foreman is seeking is not specified in court filings, but, after the hearing, Breth said the amount hasn’t been defined, but would be hundreds of thousands of dollars.
During the hearing, Breth said Foreman is claiming ownership of the high school project in perpetuity.
“They’re arguing for a perpetual contract,” Breth said.
He said the scope of the project underway at the high school was revised from the original scope of the 2008 contract.
On the other hand, Hoffman said the 2008 contract requires the district to use Foreman for the project or terminate the contract.
“This contract didn’t expire,” Hoffman said.
He said Foreman considered the 2020 and the 2022 letters from Breth as contract termination notices, and the termination entitles the firm to recover termination costs from the district.
The contract also entitles Foreman to termination costs because the high school project was suspended in 2008, Hoffman said.
Judge Kelley Streib said she will issue a ruling after reviewing the arguments and submitted evidence.
