New England Insulation Co. v. General Dynamics Corp.
522 N.E.2d 997, 26 Mass. App. Ct. 28 (1988)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A private entity that solicits bids may be held liable for damages if it violates the express or implied conditions of its solicitation, such as by engaging in a sham bidding process or misappropriating a bidder's confidential information.
Facts:
- General Dynamics Corporation invited the plaintiff to submit bids to provide insulation for spherical tanks designed to hold liquified natural gas.
- In its bid solicitations, General Dynamics represented that all submissions would be kept confidential in a locked file and would only be opened after the bid closing dates.
- Relying on these representations, the plaintiff submitted bids containing its confidential engineering and design work.
- Contrary to its representations and prior to the closing dates, officers of General Dynamics made the plaintiff's bids and confidential information available to a competitor, Frigitemp Corporation.
- The General Dynamics officers were allegedly engaged in a 'kickback' scheme with officers of Frigitemp to ensure Frigitemp would be awarded the contracts.
- General Dynamics solicited additional bids from the plaintiff at a time when it knew or should have known that the contracts had already been promised or would be awarded to Frigitemp, regardless of price or qualifications.
Procedural Posture:
- The plaintiff filed a multi-count complaint against General Dynamics Corporation in a Massachusetts trial court.
- General Dynamics filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, pursuant to Mass.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6).
- The trial court judge granted General Dynamics's motion and entered a final judgment dismissing the action against the company.
- The plaintiff, as appellant, appealed the dismissal to the Massachusetts Appeals Court, an intermediate appellate court.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a complaint state a valid claim for relief when it alleges that a private entity soliciting bids engaged in a sham bidding process, violated its own stated bidding conditions by sharing confidential information, and induced a bidder to submit bids without any real intention of fairly considering them?
Opinions:
Majority - Dreben, J.
Yes. A complaint states a valid claim for relief under these circumstances. Although requests for bids are generally non-binding invitations for offers, a bid solicitor can limit its freedom to act by making representations in its solicitations upon which it knows bidders will reasonably rely. Drawing an analogy to public contracting cases, the court reasoned that an invitation to bid based on certain conditions creates an implied promise to consider bids fairly and in accordance with those conditions. The court found no public policy that would permit private bid solicitors to ignore the conditions they set and upon which they ask others to rely. Therefore, the plaintiff's allegations of misrepresentation and participating in a sham process, in violation of the solicitation's terms, are sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss and proceed to discovery.
Analysis:
This decision extends principles traditionally applied in the public contracting sphere to private bidding contests, suggesting that private entities are not immune from liability for bad faith conduct during the bidding process. It establishes that the terms of a bid solicitation can create binding obligations on the solicitor, grounded in theories of implied contract, promissory estoppel, or misrepresentation. The ruling lowers the barrier for disappointed bidders in the private sector to sue for damages, such as bid preparation costs, when they can allege the process was a sham or that the solicitor violated its own rules. This potentially increases the legal risk for companies soliciting bids and encourages adherence to fair and transparent bidding procedures.
