Matthew D. Seeley

The firm represented a general engineering contractor in presenting and proving differing site condition claims related to a utility vault in the way of road improvements for a City project. The firm assisted the client in the delay and cost analysis. The firm then mediated a mid-project recovery and schedule reset —preventing the client from long-term financing of the City’s liability.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr., Daniel P. Scholz, and Matthew D. Seeley

The firm successfully acted as Project Counsel to a residential multi-tenant owner during a nearly two-year dispute involving significant project delays caused by a poorly performing general contractor. The firm assisted the owner in rebutting delay and extra work claims by the general contractor. With the firm’s help, the Owner successfully closed out the Project while assessing actual and liquidated damages against the contractor’s remaining contract balance, all while avoiding litigation.​

Counsel: Daniel P. Scholz and Matthew D. Seeley

The firm represented a company who uncovered an internal fraud scheme involving an employee’s misuse of a company-issued credit card. The employee had stolen company property for personal gain. The firm assisted the client in investigating the misconduct, reporting the theft to law enforcement, and filed a lawsuit against the employee. The employee agreed to a favorable settlement for the firm’s client immediately after service of the lawsuit.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr., Daniel P. Scholz, and Matthew D. Seeley

The firm was retained by a minority shareholder to resolve a management dispute over the direction of a food and beverage company it was heavily invested in. The firm negotiated an agreement among the three owners and managers to restate the operating agreement to allow non-unanimous management decisions and reduce personal exposure to company debts, to allow the company to move forward profitably and grow.  The company has operated successfully since.  Based on the firm’s efforts, management terminated its prior law firm and retained the firm to counsel it in future endeavors.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr., Daniel P. Scholz, and Matthew D. Seeley

The firm’s client was the second low bidder on a roughly $49 million dollar public works project. The firm filed a bid protest on behalf of the client, contending the apparent low bidder must be disqualified on the grounds it lacked the necessary California contractor’s license at the time of the bid. Although the public entity owner’s Bid Documents only required bidders to hold the required license by the time the project was awarded, the firm successfully argued the public entity must disqualify the apparent low bidder under Business and Professions Code, section 7028.15, subdivision (e) which requires bidders to be licensed at the time of the bid on projects only involving state or local funds. The public entity granted the protest, disqualified the low apparent bidder, and awarded the project to the firm’s client.

Counsel: P. Randolph Finch Jr., Daniel P. Scholz & Matthew D. Seeley

The firm represented a subcontractor on a private construction project. During the subcontractor’s work on the project, the prime contractor directed the subcontractor to perform millions of dollars of extra work, failed to secure timely payment from the owner, and tried to force the subcontractor to finance the work until the owner paid. The firm filed suit against the prime contractor and its payment bond surety at the first opportunity. The prime contractor filed a retaliatory cross-complaint against the firm’s client and its performance bond surety. Through timely and aggressive litigation, including extensive discovery to the prime contractor, the firm obtained a settlement favorable to the client, resulting in payment to the subcontractor and a dismissal of the cross-complaint.

Counsel: Daniel P. Scholz, and Matthew D. Seeley

The firm represented the owner of a Southern California hotel. Construction of the hotel had significant delay and cost overruns, in part, because of design errors and omissions. The firm represented the owner in a lawsuit with the hotel’s architect. After extensive discovery and mediation, the firm obtained a favorable settlement in the client’s favor on the eve of trial.

Counsel:, Daniel P. Scholz, and Matthew D. Seeley

The firm’s client was the low bidder on a $9 million public works project.  The second low bidder submitted a bid protest arguing the client was non-responsive because: (1) the client’s bond sureties had “A-” ratings rather than an “A” rating as stated in the  bid documents; and (2) certain bid documents had been notarized by an expired notary.  After written submissions, the firm successfully defended against the bid protest by proving the surety rating was equivalent to an “A” rating and the notary issue was a non-material waivable defect.  The protest was denied, and the project was awarded to the client.

Counsel: Daniel P. Scholz and Matthew D. Seeley