The firm’s client was the low bidder for a public school construction project. The client received a bid protest from the second low bidder on the grounds the client’s listed subcontractors were not qualified to perform the work as required by the specifications. The firm responded to the bid protest using its technical knowledge of bidding laws to establish the protest was improper. The firm demonstrated the protest was hypothetical and its client had multiple options for satisfying all qualification requirements of the project specifications prior to commencing performance. The awarding body agreed with the firm, and the project was awarded to the firm’s client.
Counsel: Jason R. Thornton and Scott M. Bennett