Confidential
Settlement – $329,766Judge
Court
L.A. Superior Long Beach
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Bruce D. Rudman
(Abdulaziz, Grossbart & Rudman)
Defendant
Ronald B. Pierce
(RB Pierce APLC)
Laura D. Knapp
(Office of the County County Counsel)
David A. Van Riper
(Van Riper Law)
Glenn E. Turner III
(Gibbs Giden Locher Turner Senet & Wittbrodt LLP)
Facts
In early 1996, defendant University requested bids for two separate public works projects to be performed at their site. Those projects were for the replacement and installation of boilers to their residential halls and dining
facility, and the installation of air conditioning systems at the University. The same general contractor was the
low bidder on both of those projects and was awarded the contracts by University on each of the projects.
As a requirement on all public works projects, general contractor obtained public works payment and
performance bonds for the benefit of the owner of the project, University, as well as its subcontractors.
Defendant payment bond surety issued those bonds.
Claims were made against the payment bond surety as well as the general contractor by many of the parties in this case. After being awarded each contract, general contractor entered into separate subcontract agreements with mechanical subcontractor for each of the projects.
For each of the projects, mechanical subcontractor then contracted with various material suppliers and subcontractors to provide materials and services to the two projects.
Mechanical subcontractor began construction on the projects, but some time before the completion of the projects, a dispute arose between the subcontractor and general contractor.
Mechanical subcontractor contended that he was not paid by the general contractor on a timely basis, and that the general contractor and its payment bond surety owed mechanical subcontractor an amount due on the contract, as well as various consequential damages resulting from the alleged breach of contract, totaling about $400,000.
The general contractor and payment bond surety who issued bonds on the project contended that the general contractor was justified in removing the mechanical subcontractor from the project and that it was he who caused delays and other damages to the general contractor.
Due to the nonpayment by the general contractor, various sub-subcontractors and material suppliers were also unpaid, and they too filed a lawsuit on the payment bond as well as on stop notices, in what were originally eight separate actions with the mechanical subcontractor, a defendant in each of those actions.
Also at issue were alleged deficiencies in the boilers supplied by boiler manufacturer, who contributed to the settlement, and a claim by the Labor Board because a sub-subcontractor to mechanical subcontractor allegedly failed to pay prevailing wages.
Other Information
One voluntary and three mandatory settlement conferences were held over the more than three years the case was pending. After a series of partial settlements, the case was brought to full settlement three weeks before the date set for trial.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390