P. Randolph Finch Jr.

The firm’s client was the second-low bidder on a public works contract for the City of Pomona.  However, the low bidder had not duly complied with the bid requirements.  Specifically, the low bidder had submitted an unbalanced bid with a mathematical error.  The firm  protested that the low bidder’s bid error was a non-material defect which rendered the bid non-responsive.  The City agreed, rejecting the low bid and awarding the project to the firm’s client.

Counsel: Daniel P. Scholz and Madeline L. Gilmore 

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. and Thomas E. Diamond

The firm represented a design-build contractor in arbitration related to cost overruns and delays caused by the state’s failure to acquire essential land for a critical project component. The case was heard before a three-arbitrator panel. After nine days of hearings and testimony from 15 witnesses, the panel ruled in favor of the firm’s client, awarding a total of $3.25 million.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. , Kelly A. Floyd , and Thomas E. Diamond

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. and Kelly A. Floyd

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. and Louis J. Blum

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. and Andrea L. Petray

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. and Andrea L. Petray

Cell-Crete Corporation v. Fed. Ins. Co. (2022) 82 Cal. App.5th 1090.  Payment bond surety sought fees and costs following summary judgment of plaintiff’s claims based on bond principal’s defeat of the claims in binding arbitration.  The trial court denied fees contending the fees were paid by the bond principal and not the surety.  Finch appealed the decision, resulting in the precedent setting appellate decision holding the surety does not have itself paid the fees and costs to be awarded fees and costs as the prevailing party.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. and Andrea L. Petray

The firm represented the general contractor concerning the default termination of a framing subcontractor on a remote USACE project.  The case was filed by the general contractor against the subcontractor and its performance bond surety.  The claims included the general contractor’s for costs to complete and delay, and by the subcontractor for wrongful termination, lost profits and extra work.  The case was arbitrated over four days resulting in an award in favor of the general contractor against both the subcontractor and its surety. In a total amount exceeding $2.5 million, including an award of fees and costs in excess of the penal sum of the bond.  Notably, the surety never made an offer to settle.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. and Andrea L. Petray

RAIL PROJECT

The firm represented the general contractor in defense of an underground utility subcontractor’s multi-million dollar dispute concerning project delays and contractor’s license issues related to work on a rail project in California. Less than a month before trial, the case settled on favorable terms.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr., Jason R. Thornton, and David W. Smiley 

The firm represented a general contractor bridge builder against a specialty design-build subcontractor in a lawsuit.  Both parties alleged material breach by the other.  The firm negotiated a settlement with a seven figure payment to the firm’s client, plus an offset of the pre-breach subcontract balance.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. and Thomas E. Diamond

RAIL PROJECT

The firm defended a general contractor against an indemnity claim brought by a public agency project owner in connection with an inverse condemnation claim.  As a result of the firm’s efforts, the public agency dismissed the firm’s client.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. and David W. Smiley

The firm represented a general contractor in pursuing a plumbing subcontractor and its performance bond surety for the cost to complete the subcontractor’s work after the subcontractor asserted material breach and abandoned the project during construction.

Client was general contractor for a public work of improvement.

The project was a $145 million community college expansion project.  The plumbing subcontractor alleged it was entitled to walk because the project schedule was prolonged, portions of its work were wrongfully rejected, and its subcontract scope was increased.  The subcontractor and its surety disclaimed all liability for completion costs and engaged in protracted, multi-year litigation.

Subcontractor claim defeated. $4 million awarded to general contractor.

After an eleven-day hearing featuring 27 witnesses, a three arbitrator panel rejected the subcontractor’s $2 million affirmative claim and awarded the general contractor over $4 million, including fees, costs, and interest.  The award was promptly paid by the surety, whose highest pre-arbitration offer had been to pay $500,000.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr., Andrea L. Petray, and Thomas E. Diamond

The firm was retained by a general contractor regarding the default termination of a subcontractor on a public school project.  The subcontractor had walked off the job and sued the general for approximately $570,000.00.  The firm commenced arbitration against the subcontractor seeking almost $375,000.00 in costs to complete above the subcontract balance at termination.

During discovery it was learned the subcontractor had performed work for roughly a month without the proper license classification.  The firm obtained a binding arbitration award against the subcontractor for $1,374,290.69, which included disgorgement of all amounts paid to the subcontractor, the increased costs to complete, interest, and attorneys’ fees and costs.

The award was confirmed as a judgment against the subcontractor for the full amount awarded.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr., Jason R. Thornton, and Scott M. Bennett

The firm represented a general contractor in pursuing a subcontractor’s performance bond surety for the cost to complete subcontractor’s work.  The client was the general contractor for the construction of a public work of improvement.  Its landscaping subcontractor filed bankruptcy and abandoned its work on the project—thus forcing the general contractor to complete the work.  The firm made a demand on the subcontractor’s performance bond surety and negotiated payment by the surety for the cost to complete before suit was filed.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. and Andrea L. Petray

The firm represented a joint venture of two top ENR general engineering clients in a dispute with a cellular concrete subcontractor regarding a grade separation rail project in northern California.  The dispute involved pay quantities of work performed, and delay and disruption claims by both sides of the dispute.  Based on the firm’s prior experience trying a very similar claim — and rare knowledge of the peculiarities of cellular concrete construction — the firm positioned the case for resolution at early mediation.  The case was resolved extremely efficiently on terms very favorable for the firm’s client.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. and Andrea L. Petray

The firm represented a framing subcontractor pursuing its outstanding subcontract balance which had been paid to the general contractor by the project owner, but withheld from the subcontractor.  The firm recorded a mechanic’s lien on behalf of the subcontractor and successfully obtained a summary judgment, arguing there was no dispute that all elements of a mechanic’s lien cause of action were satisfied.

The owner appealed arguing the subcontractor had no lien rights due to a recent corporate reorganization.  After extensive briefing and oral argument, the Court of Appeal upheld the judgment in favor of the subcontractor and the firm’s client was paid in full, including interest. ​

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr., Jason R. Thornton, Andrea L. Petray, and Thomas E. Diamond

The firm represented the general contractor in pursuit of its contract balance and additional time-related costs incurred on a multi-residential apartment project.

Owner in denial.

The owner withheld the entirety of the contractor’s contract balance claiming extensive project delays and resulting liquidated damages. The owner refused to accept responsibility for delays caused by extra work and defective plans, forcing the firm to file suit for the general contractor.

Legal action results in $1.5 million negotiated settlement.

Following a thorough analysis of project documents, extensive written discovery and limited depositions, the firm retained a scheduling expert and presented a detailed trial-ready schedule analysis which demonstrated, as the firm had argued from the outset of the dispute, the owner was responsible for delay. The owner’s assessment of liquidated damages was meritless. The firm ultimately negotiated a $1.5 million settlement payment from the owner to the general contractor after several rounds of mediation.

Counsel: Jason R. Thornton and Justin M. Stoger

The firm obtained a rapid recovery for a financier client on a past-due note secured by multiple properties.  The firm’s client received payment of a six-figure principal debt and all accrued interest, costs, and attorneys’ fees.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. and Thomas E. Diamond

The firm represented the general contractor in pursuit of recovery of over $1 million in extra work claims on a $13 million tenant improvement project.  Claims were pursued based on the AIA contract documents through contractual mediation resulting in payment to the firm’s client in less than 70 days from when the firm was retained.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. and Andrea L. Petray

The firm’s client was the low bidder for a state highway project in California.  The second bidder challenged the bid for listing different subcontractor participation percentages.  After the awarding state agency overruled the protest and awarded the contract to the firm’s client.

The second bidder filed a lawsuit seeking a writ of mandate.

The firm successfully persuaded the court to hear the matter on an expedited schedule so a decision could be obtained before construction work started.  After a writ of mandate trial by briefs, the judge upheld the award to the firm’s client.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr., Jason R. Thornton, and Scott M. Bennett

The firm represented a general engineering contractor in pursuit of recovery of cost overruns resulting from delay, disruption, and inefficiency incurred building a freeway realignment, bridges, high-occupancy vehicle lanes, and parking lots.

Attention to every detail paved the way to a $7.5 million settlement.

The firm’s efforts included working with the project team to identify impacts, evaluate cause and effect, and price resulting changes.  The firm presented the claims to Caltrans during arbitration proceedings which resulted in an amicable settlement with payment to the firm’s client of $7.5 million.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr.

The firm represented a mechanical subcontractor pursuing claims for extra work, delay, and disruption experienced while performing work at a federally funded construction project.  The firm developed and submitted the subcontractor’s claims to both the general contractor and the Miller Act payment bond surety.  At an informal resolution meeting — prior to initiating legal proceedings — firm attorneys negotiated a six-figure settlement in favor of the subcontractor.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. and Andrea L. Petray

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

The firm represented a subcontractor seeking recovery of the subcontract balances due for work it performed at two public schools.  The subcontractor fully performed its scope of work, but the general contractor failed to pay the subcontractor the entire subcontract amount.

The Firm filed suit for recovery on the subcontractor’s stop payment notice and on the general contractor’s payment bond for the projects at issue.

The firm engaged in significant discovery to all parties to the lawsuit and, after obtaining the responses and analyzing the project documents, was preparing to proceed to trial.  Subsequently, the firm negotiated a global settlement on behalf of the subcontractor with the payment bond surety and the subcontractor’s lower-tiers, resulting in a six-figure full recovery for the subcontractor.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. and Andrea L. Petray

Hundreds of design changes cause 15-month construction delay.

The firm represented the general contractor in its pursuit of its contract balance, a time extension, and time-related and extra-work costs.  Over 2000 RFIs and 700 changes to the project design during construction resulted in a 15-month delay to a $125 million public work of improvement, which was originally to be completed in just over two years.

Rigorous analysis and A compelling defense result in $13 million settlement.

The owner refused to provide any time extension or pay time-related and extra-work costs, exposing the contractor to millions of dollars in liquidated damages and subcontractor claims.  Following a thorough analysis of project documents, the firm and its consultants prepared a compelling argument for owner liability, and negotiated a time extension and $13 million in additional compensation for the firm’s client.​

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr., Andrea L. Petray, and Thomas E. Diamond

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

The firm represented an ENR Top 50 general contractor to recover the contract balance and repair costs incurred on the construction of a mixed-use office and apartment building in San Diego, California.  The project suffered property damages caused by a plumbing subcontractor.  The general contractor incurred significant costs to perform repairs.

The owner asserted claims against the general contractor and withheld payment.

Following a detailed analysis of project documents, the parties’ claims, and applicable insurance policies, the firm was prepared to file a lawsuit.  However, through persuasive argument — combined with its early efforts to understand its client’s positions — the firm negotiated a favorable monetary settlement with full payment to the general contractor from the owner and the owner’s OCIP insurer before a lawsuit was filed.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. and Andrea L. Petray

The firm represented a plumbing subcontractor to pursue claims for the unpaid subcontract balance plus delay and disruption for work performed at a publicly funded construction project.  After filing suit against the general contractor and its payment bond surety, the firm obtained public records demonstrating the general contractor was paid for the work of the subcontractor, but had not paid the subcontractor.

Public records leveraged in negotiating six-figure settlement.

The firm used the public records to negotiate a six-figure settlement where the general contractor paid the subcontractor all amounts due, prompt-payment penalties of two percent per month, as well as all attorneys’ fees and costs incurred to pursue payment.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. and Andrea L. Petray

The Firm represented the structural concrete subcontractor seeking recovery of payment for subcontract balance and extra work on a luxury mid-rise condominium project.

The Firm perfected its client’s mechanic’s lien and stop payment notice remedies, which were bonded off by the general contractor who contended nothing was due to the subcontractor because of defective work and delay caused by the subcontractor.  Despite the Firm’s efforts for settlement, the general contractor and its surety never made an offer to pay the Firm’s client any amount.

The dispute was tried to a San Diego jury over three weeks.

The Firm used building modeling to create 3-D demonstrative exhibits allowing the jury to see how a structural concrete building is built from the ground up, and better understand the testimony of the witnesses.  The Firm’s experts testified with demonstrative exhibits which summarized and simplified complex critical path method opinions.

The jury’s verdict was 12-0 in favor of the Firm’s client.

The jury awarded every penny the Firm asked for against both the general contractor and its surety.  Following post-trial motions, the judge awarded all requested pre-judgment interest, all expert witnesses fees, all court costs, and all attorneys’ fees incurred through the verdict.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. and Andrea L. Petray

The Firm began representing the prime contractor as project counsel concerning this unique cured-in-place pipe (CIPP) project.

The Firm helped position its client to declare owner default, stop work based on owner breaches of Public Contract Code section 1104 (lack of buildable plans), and avoid performance bond surety takeover, as well as mitigate risk with the client’s CIPP subcontractor, its surety, and liability insurers.  These tasks required a thorough understanding of the CIPP specifications, the CIPP industry players, and strong relationships with the sureties.

The project owner sought over $10 million from the Firm’s client and surety.

Post declaration of default, litigation commenced among the client, project owner, subcontractor, and sureties, with the project owner seeking more than $10 million from the Firm’s client and surety.  The Firm was able to shift defense costs to liability insurers and mitigate the out-of-pocket litigation costs to its client.  The project owner incurred over $1 million in attorneys’ fees.

The case settled for payment to the Firm’s client.

After two years of litigation, depositions of the key project participants and CIPP industry participants around the country, with a six-week jury trial looming, and following three mediation sessions over six months, the case settled for payment to the Firm’s client, hailed as an excellent result in this bet-the-company (and personal assets supporting the bonding line) case.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr., Nowell A. Lantz, and Andrea L. Petray

The Firm represented the structural concrete subcontractor seeking recovery of payment for subcontract balance and extra work.

The Firm perfected its client’s mechanic’s lien and stop payment notice remedies, which were bonded off by the general contractor who contended nothing was due to the subcontractor because of defective work and delay caused by the subcontractor.  Despite the Firm’s efforts for settlement, the general contractor and its surety never made an offer to pay the Firm’s client any amount.

The dispute was tried to a San Diego jury over three weeks.

The Firm used building modeling to create 3-D demonstrative exhibits allowing the jury to see how a structural concrete building is built from the ground up, and better understand the testimony of the witnesses.

The jury’s verdict was 12-0 in favor of the Firm’s client.

The jury awarded every penny the Firm asked for against both the general contractor and its surety.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. and Andrea L. Petray

The Firm represented a general contractor in a bid protest for award of a $100mm project.  The Firm’s client protested the low bid based on subcontractor percentage irregularities, and alleged the low bidder had an unfair competitive advantage.  The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation essentially ignored the protest resulting in the Firm filing a lawsuit for writ of mandate, injunction, and promissory estoppel.

After three separate hearings and a trial, the Superior Court issued a writ of mandate declaring the award to the low bidder illegal, issued a permanent injunction requiring the work on the project to stop, and awarding the Firm’s client nearly $300,000.00 in bid preparation costs, court costs, and interest.

The trial decision was upheld on appeal in a published decision addressing the promissory estoppel issue.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. and Jason R. Thornton

The Firm represented the second bidder in a procurement dispute concerning a $100 million HVAC improvement project at Ironwood State Prison.  The Firm’s client challenged the low bidder and successfully obtained a writ of mandate (declaring the contract awarded to the low bidder illegal) and a permanent injunction (barring further work and forcing the job to stop).

The Firm also prosecuted a promissory estoppel claim for recovery of bid preparation costs resulting in a judgment after trial of nearly $300,000.00 in bid preparation costs, court costs, and interest.  The California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation appealed the promissory estoppel judgment.

In a precedent setting case, the appellate court unanimously affirmed the judgment holding the grant of a writ of mandate and injunction, not followed by an award of the contract to the challenging bidder, is ineffective relief entitling the challenging bidder to recover bid preparation costs.

(2018) 21 Cal.App.5th 453

Counsel: Representing attorneys include P. Randolph Finch Jr. and Jason R. Thornton.

The firm represented a Riverside-based public works framing contractor in disputes covering seven separate public projects.  The projects included public schools, law enforcement and aviation facilities, and included multi-prime contract projects.  The firm filed stop notices, payment bond claims and multiple complaints on the seven jobs.  Prior to incurring extensive discovery and expert costs covering the seven projects, and after the case was assigned to the same trial judge who had entered judgment after trial in favor of another client of the firm [represented by attorneys Finch and Jones against the same defendant], the firm pushed the case into mediation.  After a comprehensive presentation by the firm, the case was resolved at the mediation.

Riverside Superior Court (Indio) Case No. INC 10005575

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr.

The firm’s client was the low bidder for the electrical bid package on a multi-prime California public high school construction project.  After the bid opening, a competing bidder protested the low bid, alleging the firm’s client lacked a mandatory installer certification and failed to meet mandatory Disabled Veteran Business Enterprise outreach requirements.  The firm immediately filed a comprehensive response to the protest and reached out to the school district’s facilities staff.  After evaluating the firm’s response, the District rejected the bid protest and awarded the electrical bid package to the firm’s client.

Desert Sands Unified School District Project

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr.

The firm’s client was the prime contractor on a five-year project to widen Interstate 405 in the Culver City/Santa Monica area.  The project suffered from numerous delays, disruptions, scope changes and differing site conditions, which resulted in more than $40 million in claims against Caltrans.  The firm worked on the contractor’s comprehensive Response To Proposed Final Estimate, which detailed the dozens of prime contractor and subcontractor claims.  The claims were later settled.

Caltrans Contract No. 07-117844

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr.

The firm initiated litigation on behalf of the electrical subcontractor on the Metropolitan Transit System’s light rail construction project which extended the San Diego Trolley system to eastern portions of San Diego County.  The project had been severely delayed and disrupted and the firm filed suit to recover: (1) subcontract balance held by the general contractor based on a liquidated damages claim asserted by the owner; and (2) delay and disruption damages incurred by the electrical subcontractor.  The firm recovered, via settlement, in excess of 100 percent of the subcontractor’s principal delay and disruption damages from the owner and the entire subcontract balance from the general contractor.  The firm’s client avoided what became a multi-month jury trial between the owner and general contractor in Imperial County.

San Diego Superior Court Case No. 37-2007-00066282-CU-BC-CTL; Imperial County Superior Court Case No. ECU03524

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr.

The firm represented an ENR Top 20 engineering contractor in recovery against Caltrans for delay, disruption, differing site conditions, and quantity adjustment claims through the Office of Administrative Hearing Arbitration process.  The firm recovered payment to its client of $8.79 million.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr.

The firm represented an ENR Top 20 engineering contractor in recovery against Caltrans for delay, disruption, differing site conditions, and quantity adjustment claims.  The firm recovered payment to its client of $11.6 million.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr.

The firm represented an ENR Top 30 engineering contractor in recovery against Caltrans for delay, disruption, differing site conditions, and quantity adjustment claims through the Office of Administrative Hearings Arbitration process.  The firm recovered payment to its client of $9.2 million.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr.

The firm represented the general contractor as project counsel with regard to a bridge replacement job in the City of Los Angeles.  The project was plagued with differing site conditions, environmental restrictions, extra work, and related issues.  The firm’s efforts over a three-year period, included managing consultants to assist with time impact analyses, impact pricing and presentations, and resulted in an increase to the contract price of $6.1 million and amicable closeout of the project.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr.

The firm represented a material supplier in a claim for recovery of amounts due for materials it furnished to a subcontractor on a publicly funded construction project. The firm was brought in prior to completion of the project to enforce stop notice, payment bond, and contract claims. After the firm filed suit against the subcontractor, general contractor, project owner and payment bond surety, the matter settled with payment to the firm’s client of the full principal amount due, plus attorneys’ fees.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr. and Andrea L. Petray