The Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled on July 8, 2026, in the case of The Boldt Company v. Black & Veatch Construction, Inc., affirming a jury's nominal damages verdict. This decision affects both companies involved in a contract dispute over the construction of a windfarm in Illinois, highlighting the complexities of contract law and project management.
The case originated when Black & Veatch Construction, Inc., a Missouri corporation, hired The Boldt Company, a Wisconsin corporation, as a subcontractor for a windfarm project in Good Hope, Illinois. The project was intended to include the assembly of 60 wind turbines, but complications arose that led to delays in construction. After Boldt failed to meet deadlines, Black & Veatch terminated the subcontract, claiming Boldt breached their agreement. Boldt subsequently filed a lawsuit, alleging wrongful termination and other claims against Black & Veatch.
The dispute escalated to the federal court level under diversity jurisdiction, with both parties filing cross-motions for summary judgment. The district court ruled in favor of Black & Veatch, concluding that Boldt defaulted on the subcontract by not performing on schedule. Following a trial that focused on damages, the jury awarded Black & Veatch only nominal damages of $1, despite their claims of nearly $39 million in damages.
In its ruling, the Seventh Circuit, led by Judge Kirsch, affirmed the jury's decision and the district court's summary judgment in part. The court found that the jury's award of nominal damages was appropriate given the evidence presented. The ruling stated, "Black & Veatch failed to provide a proper basis for computing its damages, only nominal damages (i.e., $1.00) can be recovered." This highlights the importance of providing clear and credible evidence in legal disputes.
The court's decision also reversed part of the district court's summary judgment, indicating that there were material disputes regarding the reasons for the delays and whether Boldt had adequately notified Black & Veatch of those delays. The court noted that the subcontract included provisions allowing Boldt to claim delays caused by Black & Veatch or GE, provided they followed the proper notification procedures.
This ruling has significant implications for both companies and the construction industry. It underscores the necessity for clear communication and documentation in contractual relationships, especially in complex projects like windfarm construction. The decision also serves as a reminder that parties must substantiate their claims for damages with credible evidence to avoid nominal damages awards.
Looking ahead, the case may not be over for Boldt, as they have indicated the possibility of pursuing additional claims related to work completed prior to termination. The court's ruling on the post-trial motions suggests that Boldt's claims for payment for completed work could be pursued in a separate lawsuit.
In summary, the Seventh Circuit's ruling in The Boldt Company v. Black & Veatch Construction, Inc. emphasizes the importance of adhering to contractual obligations and the need for thorough documentation in construction projects. The outcome of this case may influence future contract disputes in the construction industry, particularly regarding how damages are calculated and awarded.