Surety on Public Works Payment Bond Must Pay Attorney Fees Incurred by Prevailing Claimant Even Though the Principal on the Bond Is Not Liable for Them

No Own Work Exclusion
Florida, South Carolina Supreme Courts Hold that Contractors’ CGL Policies Cover Damages Arising from Subs’ Defective Work

Rate-Gouging Alleged
Freely Negotiated Wholesale Energy Contracts Are Presumed Enforceable Unless They Seriously Harm Public Interest, U.S. Supreme Court Holds

State Law Pre-Empted
Materials in New Home Constitute Interstate Commerce, So Federal Arbitration Act Controls, California Court Holds

29 Lawyers Honored
Thelen Receives 2008 Chambers Award for Excellence in Construction Law

Essence Is Voluntary
Party Cannot Be Compelled to Participate in, Pay for Mediation, California Court Holds

Immigration Issue
Federal Contractors Must Use E-Verify to Check Employee Work Status, President Orders

New or Significantly Improved
$38 Billion in U.S. Loan Guarantees for Alternative Energy Technologies – Overview of Selection Process and Financing Terms

New FAR Rule
Federal Contractors Can Lose Out on Projects, Be Debarred for Tax Delinquencies

Previous Issues

Construction Industry News


	Surety on Public Works Payment Bond Must Pay Attorney Fees Incurred by Prevailing Claimant Even Though the Principal on the Bond Is Not Liable for Them May 3, 2004


	Back to Industry Newsletters

(A version of this article will appear in the Construction Law Digests, published by the West Group.)

By James E. Acret

Mechanical subcontractor Scott filed an action against prime contractor Blount, Inc. to recover cost overruns on a City of San Jose redevelopment project. Blount made a Code of Civil Procedure §998 offer of $900,000, and Scott obtained judgment for only $442,054. Blount satisfied the judgment. Scott contended that the surety still was liable for the balance of its claim and also for attorney fees incurred after the §998 offer.

As for the balance of the claim, the surety's liability was held to be commensurate with that of the principal as provided in Civil Code §2809. Scott Co. of California v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Insurance Co., 107 Cal.App.4th 197, 132 Cal.Rptr.2d 89, 2003 DJDAR 3245 (2003). Blount satisfied the judgment. Therefore, the liability of the principal had been discharged, and the surety was not liable for the balance of the claim.

As to attorney fees, however, the situation is different. Civil Code §3250 provides that in an action on a public works payment bond, the court shall award to the prevailing party a reasonable attorney fee. Scott was the prevailing party, but Blount was relieved of any obligation to pay Scott's attorney fees because Scott rejected Blount's §998 offer and failed to achieve a more favorable outcome. The general suretyship rule that the obligation of the surety is co-extensive with that of the principal must yield to the special mandate of §3250, which furthers the strong policy favoring mechanics, laborers and materialmen by imposing an independent statutory obligation on sureties.

If you would like to receive legal reports and updates more quickly, by e-mail, click here and fill out the mailing list form.

To learn more about Thelen Reid's Construction and Government Contracts Department, click here. For more information about books and other legal materials written by James Acret, click here and enter "Acret" in the Search Products Field. To learn more about topics covered in this article, contact Paul Berning at (415) 369-7229 or at pwberning@thelen.com.

©2004 Thelen Reid Brown Raysman & Steiner LLP