Best Best & Krieger News Feed

BB&K Wins Jury Trial In Construction Dispute

05 Jan 2007 00:00:00 -0800

MCP Industries, Inc. v. Fisher Tracks, Inc.

BB&K Partner John Higginbotham represented a contractor, Fisher Tracks, Inc., in protracted litigation culminating in a month long jury trial against one of its material suppliers. After Fisher Tracks refused to pay for allegedly defective material, a polyurethane glue used in the installation of synthetic running tracks, MCP filed a collections action seeking approximately $59,000 in damages. Fisher Tracks filed a cross-complaint seeking several times that amount, representing the cost of tearing out and replacing several running tracks. After a month long jury trial, involving extensive expert testimony on both sides, the jury reached a verdict and completed an 80-question special verdict form in less than four hours, awarding Fisher Tracks the exact amount requested in closing argument. The case settled shortly thereafter for the full amount of the verdict plus an additional nearly $200,000 in recognition of BB&K’s anticipated victory on a pending motion for attorneys' fees. At the end of the day, BB&K’s client achieved a total victory and was made completely whole.

BB&K Achieves Favorable Settlement from Contractor for Fraudulent Billings

02 Jun 2004 00:00:00 -0800

City of Azusa v. Simich Construction Company

BB&K Partner John Higginbotham represented the City of Azusa in City of Azusa v. Simich Construction Company. The case involved fraudulent billings by a contractor, which were later discovered in the course of a contract dispute on a subsequent public works project. As the City’s designated prosecuting authority, BB&K sued the contractor for violations of the False Claims Act. The contractor filed a cross-complaint for breach of contract. The case was ultimately settled on terms highly favorable to the City, which included the contractor receiving nothing and the City retaining a substantial sum of money on the subsequent project which would otherwise have been payable to the contractor.

BB&K Achieves Favorable Settlement from Large, East Coast Contractor

19 Jul 2002 00:00:00 -0800

City of Corona v. Ionics, Incorporated, et al.

BB&K Partners John Higginbotham and Victor Wolf represented the City of Corona in City of Corona v. Ionics, Incorporated, et al. The case involved construction of an $11 million desalinization plant by a large publicly traded contracting firm from the East Coast. Following completion, the contractor submitted a $3.5 million extra work claim, alleging that the City had delayed construction of the project and improperly withheld $1.3 million in liquidated damages. The contractor initially filed suit out-of-state. BB&K successfully moved to have that lawsuit dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. BB&K then seized the offensive by suing the contractor and several of its sub-contractors for multiple violations of the False Claims Act in State court. The contractor filed a cross-complaint for $3.5 million in extra work. Despite being out-spent nearly 3-to-1 by the contractor’s army of lawyers, BB&K achieved a highly favorable settlement which included the City retaining approximately $900,000 in liquidated damages and not paying the contractor anything on its cross-complaint.