Finch, Thornton & Baird, LLP attorney Lindsey C. Herzik.

Lindsey C. Herzik

Attorney

Ever passionate about resolving client problems, Lindsey takes the time necessary to thoroughly understand each client’s unique business and legal challenges and objectives. An innate curiosity drives her methodical analysis of legal, judicial, and administrative precedents.

Attorneys

yuremvx@sgoynj.pbz

(858) 737-3100, Ext. 3108

(858) 737-3101

PROFILE

Lindsey Herzik is a pragmatic litigator who works with business owners, senior executives, and in-house counsel in areas of business and commercial litigation, and construction law including pre-litigation dispute resolution through trial and/or arbitration, and judgment.  Her practice involves complex and large-scale public and private works, owner and general contractor disputes, general and subcontractor disputes, joint-venture disputes, contract defaults, surety bond and Miller Act claims, writs, and lien law.  Clients include general contractors, specialty subcontractors, and tenants and landlords.

Ever passionate about resolving client problems, Lindsey takes the time necessary to thoroughly understand each client’s unique business and legal challenges and objectives. An innate curiosity drives her methodical analysis of legal, judicial, and administrative precedents. It can be rigorous work. But it is essential to informing the creative thought process required to shape legal strategies that are most favorable to our clients.

DELAY, INEFFICIENCY, AND EXTRA WORK CLAIMS

Construction project participants regularly suffer the monetary and operational pains caused by delays, design mistakes, project inefficiencies, interferences, and other unforeseen issues.  Lindsey understands the questions to ask, what information to obtain, and which legal strategies to deploy.  This helps ease client concerns, contain disputes, and accelerate the resolution process.

FEDERAL PROCUREMENT AND CLAIMS

Federal prime contractors and subcontractors know that achieving success in the highly regulated federal construction arena can be a challenge.  Payment disputes with the government or between subcontractors and prime contractors are common.  Whether she is coordinating schedule, design, accounting, and construction industry experts or evaluating a potential request for equitable adjustment, Lindsey is a task master focused on getting the job done — and done right.  It is this kind of experience that Lindsey — and her Finch, Thornton & Baird, LLP colleagues — delivers when efficient resolution of claims or reconsideration of procurement decisions is the goal.

COLLECTIONS PROSECUTION

General contractors, design-builders, and construction managers often encounter payment delays from project owners.  In turn, trade subcontractors suffer from not being paid their contract balance or for extra work performed for the general contractor or owner.  Lindsey offers experience in securing payment rights through mechanic’s liens, stop payment notices, and payment bonds.  The goal is simple: maximizing recovery through early resolution and fast collections.

EXPERIENCE

  • Construction litigation
  • Public and private works disputes
  • Delay, inefficiency, and extra work claims
  • Construction defect and defective work claims
  • Local, state, federal, private collection, and bond actions
  • Coordination with schedule, design, accounting, and subject matter experts on construction claims
  • Contract defaults
  • Insurance coverage
  • Stop payment notices
  • Payment bond claims
  • Request for equitable adjustments (REAs)
  • Surety obligations
  • General business litigation
  • Real property
  • Landlord/tenant disputes
  • Arbitration

RESULTS

Infrastructure/Bridge Contractor v. Surveying Company

The firm represented one of the largest bridge builders in the country in a dispute with a surveying company over the layout of bridge abutments.  The firm’s client alleged the surveyor made an error in its calculations resulting in improper layout and construction of two abutments in reliance on the survey data and staking.

Ensuing redesign resulted in additional costs, delay, and extra work.

The survey error required a redesign and enlargement of the two bridge abutments at an increased cost for the delay and extra work.  The firm prosecuted the claims in arbitration to a successful recovery of all of the increased costs its client incurred, plus profit on the extra work, and attorneys’ fees, for a total recovery of $1.85 million.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. and Lindsey C. Herzik

General Contractor Prevails In Wind Energy Construction Dispute

The firm represented the general contractor in a dispute with a multi-national subcontractor over the construction of 100 wind turbine generators in central California.

The project was delayed – causing the general contractor to declare the subcontractor in default.  The subcontractor claimed over $8 million in additional construction costs due to changes, weather delays, impacts, and acceleration.  The subcontractor brought arbitration against the general contractor for the increased costs.

The firm’s first task was to evaluate the merits of the parties’ positions and determine whether the case could be settled.  Based on the firm’s recommendation, the general contractor made a seven-figure statutory offer to settle the dispute.  The subcontractor rejected the settlement offer.

Discovery results in critical insights.

Through discovery, the firm learned the subcontractor had not been properly licensed, had executed certain claim releases during construction, and had not incurred the claimed acceleration costs.  Discovery took multiple years, with twenty-four depositions across the country and in Canada.  The matter proceeded to a three-week arbitration at which eighteen witnesses were called.  During arbitration, the firm successfully rebutted the subcontractor’s excessive and inflated claims.

Firm and client prevail in arbitration.

Following arbitration, the subcontractor was awarded a small percentage of its overall claim.  Most importantly, the amount awarded to the subcontractor was less than the settlement amount offered by the general contractor years before.  As a result, the arbitrator ruled the firm’s client was the prevailing party in the matter, and that the firm’s client was entitled to its attorneys’ fees and costs to defend against the claim.

In the end, the firm’s client paid nothing to the subcontractor — a result significantly better for the firm’s client than had it accepted any of the multiple settlement offers made by the subcontractor.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr., Daniel P. Scholz, and Lindsey C. Herzik

PROFILE

Lindsey Herzik is a pragmatic litigator who works with business owners, senior executives, and in-house counsel in areas of business and commercial litigation, and construction law including pre-litigation dispute resolution through trial and/or arbitration, and judgment.  Her practice involves complex and large-scale public and private works, owner and general contractor disputes, general and subcontractor disputes, joint-venture disputes, contract defaults, surety bond and Miller Act claims, writs, and lien law.  Clients include general contractors, specialty subcontractors, and tenants and landlords.

Ever passionate about resolving client problems, Lindsey takes the time necessary to thoroughly understand each client’s unique business and legal challenges and objectives. An innate curiosity drives her methodical analysis of legal, judicial, and administrative precedents. It can be rigorous work. But it is essential to informing the creative thought process required to shape legal strategies that are most favorable to our clients.

DELAY, INEFFICIENCY, AND EXTRA WORK CLAIMS

Construction project participants regularly suffer the monetary and operational pains caused by delays, design mistakes, project inefficiencies, interferences, and other unforeseen issues.  Lindsey understands the questions to ask, what information to obtain, and which legal strategies to deploy.  This helps ease client concerns, contain disputes, and accelerate the resolution process.

FEDERAL PROCUREMENT AND CLAIMS

Federal prime contractors and subcontractors know that achieving success in the highly regulated federal construction arena can be a challenge.  Payment disputes with the government or between subcontractors and prime contractors are common.  Whether she is coordinating schedule, design, accounting, and construction industry experts or evaluating a potential request for equitable adjustment, Lindsey is a task master focused on getting the job done — and done right.  It is this kind of experience that Lindsey — and her Finch, Thornton & Baird, LLP colleagues — delivers when efficient resolution of claims or reconsideration of procurement decisions is the goal.

COLLECTIONS PROSECUTION

General contractors, design-builders, and construction managers often encounter payment delays from project owners.  In turn, trade subcontractors suffer from not being paid their contract balance or for extra work performed for the general contractor or owner.  Lindsey offers experience in securing payment rights through mechanic’s liens, stop payment notices, and payment bonds.  The goal is simple: maximizing recovery through early resolution and fast collections.

EXPERIENCE

  • Construction litigation
  • Public and private works disputes
  • Delay, inefficiency, and extra work claims
  • Construction defect and defective work claims
  • Local, state, federal, private collection, and bond actions
  • Coordination with schedule, design, accounting, and subject matter experts on construction claims
  • Contract defaults
  • Insurance coverage
  • Stop payment notices
  • Payment bond claims
  • Request for equitable adjustments (REAs)
  • Surety obligations
  • General business litigation
  • Real property
  • Landlord/tenant disputes
  • Arbitration

RESULTS

Infrastructure/Bridge Contractor v. Surveying Company

The firm represented one of the largest bridge builders in the country in a dispute with a surveying company over the layout of bridge abutments.  The firm’s client alleged the surveyor made an error in its calculations resulting in improper layout and construction of two abutments in reliance on the survey data and staking.

Ensuing redesign resulted in additional costs, delay, and extra work.

The survey error required a redesign and enlargement of the two bridge abutments at an increased cost for the delay and extra work.  The firm prosecuted the claims in arbitration to a successful recovery of all of the increased costs its client incurred, plus profit on the extra work, and attorneys’ fees, for a total recovery of $1.85 million.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. and Lindsey C. Herzik

General Contractor Prevails In Wind Energy Construction Dispute

The firm represented the general contractor in a dispute with a multi-national subcontractor over the construction of 100 wind turbine generators in central California.

The project was delayed – causing the general contractor to declare the subcontractor in default.  The subcontractor claimed over $8 million in additional construction costs due to changes, weather delays, impacts, and acceleration.  The subcontractor brought arbitration against the general contractor for the increased costs.

The firm’s first task was to evaluate the merits of the parties’ positions and determine whether the case could be settled.  Based on the firm’s recommendation, the general contractor made a seven-figure statutory offer to settle the dispute.  The subcontractor rejected the settlement offer.

Discovery results in critical insights.

Through discovery, the firm learned the subcontractor had not been properly licensed, had executed certain claim releases during construction, and had not incurred the claimed acceleration costs.  Discovery took multiple years, with twenty-four depositions across the country and in Canada.  The matter proceeded to a three-week arbitration at which eighteen witnesses were called.  During arbitration, the firm successfully rebutted the subcontractor’s excessive and inflated claims.

Firm and client prevail in arbitration.

Following arbitration, the subcontractor was awarded a small percentage of its overall claim.  Most importantly, the amount awarded to the subcontractor was less than the settlement amount offered by the general contractor years before.  As a result, the arbitrator ruled the firm’s client was the prevailing party in the matter, and that the firm’s client was entitled to its attorneys’ fees and costs to defend against the claim.

In the end, the firm’s client paid nothing to the subcontractor — a result significantly better for the firm’s client than had it accepted any of the multiple settlement offers made by the subcontractor.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr., Daniel P. Scholz, and Lindsey C. Herzik

Ever passionate about resolving client problems, Lindsey takes the time necessary to thoroughly understand each client’s unique business and legal challenges and objectives. An innate curiosity drives her methodical analysis of legal, judicial, and administrative precedents.

Attorneys

yuremvx@sgoynj.pbz

(858) 737-3100, Ext. 3108

(858) 737-3101

SUPPORT

Rebekah E. Romero
Legal Secretary

eebzreb@sgoynj.pbz

PRACTICES

  • Construction Law
    • Claims & Disputes
    • Local Agency, Municipal & State Contracts
    • Federal Procurement & Claims
    • Real Estate
    • Collections
  • Business & Commercial Litigation

ADMISSIONS

  • California: State Courts
  • U.S. District Courts of California: Northern
  • Arizona: State Courts
  • U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona

EDUCATION

  • University of San Diego School of Law, J.D., magna cum laude
    • Order of the Coif
    • Judicial Extern to the Honorable Gonzalo P. Curiel
    • Comments Editor, San Diego Law Review
    • “A Better IDEA: Implementing a Nationwide Definition for Significant Disproportionality to Combat Overrepresentation of Minority Students in Special Education,” 52 San Diego L. Rev. 951 (2015)
  • Loyola University of Chicago, B.A., Journalism, cum laude
  • Law Clerk to the Honorable Diane Humetewa, U.S. District Court, District of Arizona

MEMBERSHIPS

  • State Bar of California
  • State Bar of Arizona
Back To Top