Construction Law

Exceptional service doesn’t just happen

Construction Law

Our Construction Law Practice Group is a committed partner through all phases of your construction project. Our attorneys are actively involved in matters encompassing:

  • Construction Defect
  • Liens and Stop Notices
  • Public and Private Contract Disputes and Contract Drafting
  • CSLB Actions and Compliance
  • Construction Site Injuries

Experience and Commitment

Our clients include developers, general contractors, public entities, subcontractors, equipment suppliers and product manufacturers. During the last five years, our Construction Law Practice Group has represented over 300 clients in nearly every California forum involving a broad range of construction issues. Attorneys in our Construction Law Practice Group are experienced and prepared to confront the special challenges and nuances of the evolving economy and construction industry. Haight’s success does not come by accident; rather, it comes as a result of an intense dedication to client service and rigorously adhering to a code of best practices that have withstood the test of time. Our attorneys are industry leaders when it comes to litigation and innovation by using technology to drive down costs, increase productivity, achieve our client’s objectives and obtain results. As one example, Haight’s attorneys have won the vast majority of their duty to defend motions (i.e., “Crawford motions”) and have pioneered an approach that significantly reduces the time and paperwork associated with filing a complex motion against dozens of parties simultaneously. In another matter that went to trial, the case settled the day after our opening statement in which our developer client paid nothing in settlement and was reimbursed 100% of its attorneys’ fees and costs.

Haight knows that to represent an industry, you have to know the industry. Therefore, you’ll often find us speaking at seminars on construction topics, writing articles for publication, providing seminars to clients, and we are active members of many associations, such as the Legal Action Committee of the California Building Association, the Board of Directors of ALFA, the Southern California Region of the American College of Trial Lawyers (ACTL) and the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA).

  • Construction Defect
  • Mechanics Liens, Stop Notices & Miller Act
  • Contract Disputes & Drafting
  • CSLB Actions and Compliance
  • Worksite Injuries
  • Construction Law Client Successes

Our attorneys have broad and deep experience in all phases of complex construction defect matters. We have worked on cases involving high rise condominiums with hundreds of units, massive residential subdivisions, schools, hospitals, community centers, commercial buildings, shopping centers, and many other types of projects and facilities. Our attorneys have litigated almost every conceivable design and construction defect ranging from the observable (e.g., leaking windows) to the invisible (e.g., inadequate air changes) and from the catastrophic (e.g., structural collapse because of dry rot) to the obscure (e.g., is a condominium unit defective if it is too hot?).

Attorneys in the Construction Law Practice Group have also mastered the nuances of handling Wrap-up projects and the special considerations that Wrap cases bring to the table. We work closely with the Developer, General Contractor, and the retained consultant to promptly evaluate Wrap claims and implement a plan to resolve them. Haight’s track record of success is the due in large part to a customized step-by-step process that we follow; a process that often settles cases quickly while making the most use out of the self-insured retention.

Haight routinely handles liens and stop notices on a wide array of projects, including K-12 schools, movie theatres, movie studios, community colleges, Cal-Trans projects, churches, community recreation centers, hospitals, and multi-family / single family projects. Our attorneys have handled lien and stop notice issues for owners, contractors, subcontractors and equipment suppliers. In fact, Haight’s Construction Law attorneys represent one of the nation’s largest crane rental companies in its California construction litigation in matters involving, mechanics liens, stop notices for private works of improvement as well as federal (Miller Act), state and municipal projects.

Our attorneys have experience in all varieties of complex contract disputes. We have achieved success in claims involving delays, disputed change orders, public contracts, and contract interpretation, among others for owners and contractors on facilities such as hospitals, schools, and various other public facilities. We believe that early client and expert engagement in these cases is critical in order to correctly posture it for resolution. Our attorneys also advise clients on contract issues to ensure their contracts are updated to reflect changes in the law and provide maximum benefit to the client. Issues involving indemnity, insurance, and dispute resolution are frequent areas of counseling.

We regularly advise clients on issues relating to compliance with Chapter 9, Division 3, of the California Business and Professions Code, including advertising, ownership, contractor name and general licensing. We have also represented contractors on issues having to deal with contractor licensing bond claims.

Our attorneys have represented numerous companies in minor to catastrophic worksite injuries. These cases involve complex issues of compliance with OSHA regulations, workers compensation liens, indemnity obligations, and retained control over worksite safety.

BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS

Dismissal of Fraud Claim Against Builder: Represented a builder in an action brought by 32 individual homeowners at a condominium project with 500+ units alleging misrepresentation of the square footage of the units and failure to disclose the existence of hazardous soils. After successfully eliminating numerous claims, including one for fraud, Haight obtained a dismissal of the case for failure to prosecute. The builder will be able to recover its costs from the plaintiffs. A case involving the HOA is currently pending.

Representation of Condominium Developer in Construction Defect Litigation: Represented the developer of a 53 unit condominium against allegations of design defects, structural problems, and failure of the building’s exterior siding. Initial demand by the homeowners association was $5 million. A cross-complaint was filed on behalf of the developer and Crawford tenders were sent to all subcontractors. With the trade insurers participating in the developer’s defense, the developer was able to settle for less than 15% of the initial demand. The developer then prosecuted its cross-complaint against the non-settling subcontractors and obtained a judgment against a recalcitrant subcontractor approximately equivalent to the amount paid in settlement.

Representation of Prime Contractor in Hospital Delay Claim: Represented a prime contractor in an arbitration commenced by a county for more than $3 million in liquidated damages following the late delivery of a hospital. The prime contractor contended concurrent delays existed as a result of the county’s actions and a subcontractor. The matter resolved prior to arbitration.

Representation of Developer Over Inadequate Improvements at Subdivision: Defended a developer for allegedly failing to disclose that street parking was not allowed in the subdivision. The developer contended that proper disclosures were made. Matter quickly settled after contact was made with the plaintiff homeowner’s attorney

Representation of Developers Seeking Declaration of Duty to Defend: Successfully represented several developers in construction litigation where a declaration from the Superior Court was obtained stating various subcontractors were contractually obligated to defend the litigation pursuant to the California Supreme Court case of Crawford v. Weathershield.

Defense Under Burning Limits Policy: Represented developer in lawsuit filed by homeowners association arising from the construction of a 24 unit condominium project in Canyon Country, California. The allegations focused on visible deflections and sagging in the roof, stucco cracking, and cracks in driveways, garage slabs, and flatwork. A cross-complaint was filed on behalf of our client against the subcontractor trades involved in the project. Crawford tenders were immediately provided to the trades and their insurers to preserve available reserves under the client’s defense within limits policy. Through strict enforcement of the subcontractors’ duty to defend, the client’s burning limits policy was preserved thereby allowing funds to be allocated toward settlement.

GENERAL CONTRACTORS & SUBCONTRACTORS

Representation of General Contractor in Construction Defect Litigation: Represented a general contractor against claims by a homeowners association of a 64 unit condominium where there was major dry-rot as a result of water intrusion through the exterior walkways. Shoring was required to provide support for the walkways. Plaintiff’s demand exceeded $6 million. A cross-complaint was filed on behalf of the general contractor and Crawford tenders were sent to all subcontractors. With the trade insurers participating in the developer’s defense, the general contractor (who self-performed the framing) was able to execute a non-global settlement with an assignment. Our client’s settlement contribution was approximately 8% on a claim that settled for over $4 million.

Representation of Subcontractor in Payment Dispute Over (Then) Largest Laser in The World: Represented a subcontractor in a payment dispute involving improvements at the Lawrence Livermore National Lab. The project involved the construction of the world’s (then) largest laser, designed to recreate identical conditions of the Big Bang. A dispute arose about the quality of the fabrication efforts and a suit was filed to obtain the balance of his contract amount stated at $4 million. After a three week jury trial, the jury awarded only $44,000.

Representation of Subcontractor in Contract and Payment Dispute in Public Works Project: Defended subcontractor in a public works project involving the construction of a movie theater. The prime contractor claimed that the subcontractor walked off the job, and as a result, he incurred over $1 million in damages in retaining another contractor to complete the work. On behalf of the subcontractor, Haight filed suit on the stop notice claim, claiming the contractor wrongfully withheld hundreds of thousands of dollars from our client. The matter was stayed pending bankruptcy of a party.

Fifty-Two Single Family Home Development Litigation: Defended concrete subcontractor in construction litigation involving 52 single family homes in Moreno Valley, California. Plaintiffs alleged severely cracked flatwork, garage slab cracks, house slab cracks, and resultant damage to vinyl, wood, and marble flooring. Developer had minimal insurance and limited contribution from additional insureds, which precipitated an inflated settlement demand. After a critical scope of work, issue was resolved in favor of our client, all claims settled for $14,000.

Representation of Sheet Metal Contractor: Retained to represent sheet metal contractor for massive apartment complex just days before trial. Plaintiffs’ cost of repair included a claim that there were 130 leaking decks, and their demand to client was $3.5 million. After several weeks of trial, matter settled for $400,000.

Representation of Drilling Company in Multi-Unit Ocean Front Property Litigation: Substituted in as counsel for a drilling company late in the litigation concerning multi-unit ocean front rental property in Venice Beach, California. The allegations against multiple defendants alleged soils movement and resultant structural damage to the plaintiff’s property. Our client’s prior counsel recommended paying the lion’s share of a seven figure settlement. By leveraging the client’s contractual indemnity rights as an additional insured, settlement was reached for substantially less than the amount originally recommended.

Establishing Compliance with Building Standards: Defended stucco contractor in litigation involving 26 homeowners. The client used a three step process instead of a five step process, which raised the issue of whether he had complied with the standard of care. The client proved through expert testimony and other evidence he had used reasonable care, and the homeowners’ damage claim was excessive. Settlement was reached before trial.

SCHOOL DISTRICTS

Public Contract Code Dispute: Retained to handle the appeal of a delay claim against a school district. At trial, the prime contractor was awarded over $2 million in damages, including a significant penalty for violating Public Contract Code Section 7107 regarding prompt payment of retention. The appeal focused on when the project was completed for purposes of payment of retention under 7107, and the jury’s disregard of the undisputed evidence regarding the completion date. Result was a favorable settlement prior to oral argument.

Bidding Dispute: Advised a school district on its rights/obligations under the Public Contract Code as it related to non-conforming bids and the district’s rights to reject all bids in various situations.

INSURANCE COVERAGE

Reshaping Construction Defect Litigation in San Diego: Represented excess insurer in construction litigation that evolved into one of the biggest construction defect cases in the history of San Diego. The claims arose from 1,632 homes on 350 acres belonging to members of a premier country club in Oceanside, California. The litigation reshaped the way construction defect cases are handled in San Diego.

WORKSITE INJURY

Subcontractor’s Employee Falls off Roof: Represented a subcontractor who worked on a construction project at UC Riverside. Subcontractor’s employee was working on a roof and fell resulting in serious injuries. After thirteen days of trial, our client was dismissed. Result saved the client $5 million.