The contractor will not be liable to the owner for loss or damage which results solely from insufficiencies or defects in such information, plans and specifications.

[2] The Supreme Court wrote: "Where one agrees to do, for a fixed sum, a thing possible to be performed, he will not be excused or become entitled to additional compensation, because unforeseen difficulties are encountered.

Thus one who undertakes to erect a structure upon a particular site, assumes ordinarily the risk of subsidence of the soil.

This responsibility of the owner is not overcome by the usual clauses requiring builders to visit the site, to check the plans, and to inform themselves of the requirements of the work...the contractor should be relieved, if he was misled by erroneous statements in the specifications.

"[3] Related to the Spearin doctrine is the "implied warranty of adequacy", that the government is responsible to provide accurate plans and specifications to its contractors rather than the presumption of superior knowledge.