A federal judge on Thursday refused a bizarre request to let the defendant become the plaintiff in a trial over who breached what contract in the construction of the C-470 express toll lanes south of Denver.

Originally, AECOM Technical Services, Inc. filed suit for breach of contract, claiming it was owed over $5 million from unpaid design work. The defendants, a construction joint venture named Flatiron | AECOM, LLC, lodged its own counterclaim against the designer, again alleging breach of contract.

Ten days before the start of an 18-day jury trial, Flatiron | AECOM filed a motion “confessing judgment” — admitting it would pay the nearly $5.3 million AECOM Technical Services claimed it was owed.

However, the proposal came with strings attached: U.S. District Court Senior Judge William J. Martínez would dismiss the plaintiff’s related claim for unjust enrichment, Flatiron | AECOM would swap sides and become the plaintiff at trial, plus the jury would not hear any evidence about the money Flatiron | AECOM withheld from the design firm.

AECOM Technical Services refused to accept those terms, arguing the gambit would “create chaos” after the parties spent considerable time getting ready for trial.

“ATS prepared its opening statement, prepared its witness examinations and cross-examinations based on being plaintiff with an affirmative claim to prove, and secured and scheduled the necessary fact and expert witnesses based on the trial schedule confirmed at the Final Trial Preparation Conference,” the designer’s lawyers wrote. “Now that ATS has spent the extraordinary time and effort required to start trial next week as plaintiff, ATS is no longer interested in accepting a confessed judgment.”

In a brief order on Jan. 25, Martínez agreed Flatiron | AECOM’s proposal was a no-go, slamming the defendant for its 11th-hour, conditional admission of liability.

“While the Court observes that in practical terms it borders on the absurd to try AECOM’s claims under these circumstances,” he wrote, “it also concludes that there is simply no justifiable reason that Flatiron waited until days before trial to request such relief.”

Noting AECOM Technical Services stood by its desire for a jury trial, Martínez could find no reason “to impose, by means of a judicial order, what amounts to a settlement offer by Flatiron on AECOM without the latter’s consent.”

The trial begins on Jan. 29.

The case is AECOM Technical Services, Inc. v. FLATIRON | AECOM, LLC.