Procedural Requirements Of California's "Fix It" Law Upheld
Standard Pacific Corporation v. Superior Court of San Bernardino (Garlow) (2009) ___ Cal. App. 4th ____ (Aug. 14, 2009, No. E046844)
By James Pugh
The Fourth District Court of Appeal recently held that construction-defect plaintiffs must provide developers with notice and an opportunity to repair before filing suit. This holding in Standard Pacific Corporation v. Superior Court of San Bernardino (Garlow) confirms the procedural requirement of Senate Bill 800, which is also known as the “Fix It Law.”
Construction Manager Not Required to be Licensed pursuant to the Contractors' State License Law
The Fifth Day, LLC v. James P. Bolotin, et al., ___ Cal.App.4th ___(March 27, 2009, No KC047712)
By Jon E. Maki & Bram Hanono
The California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District determined that an entity which provided construction management services to a private owner developing commercial real property was not required to be licensed as a contractor pursuant to the Contractors' State License Law ("CSLL") (opinion by Acting Presiding Justice Armstrong, concurrence by Justice Krieger). In a lengthy dissent, Justice Mosk disagreed, highlighting that the intent of the CSLL is to protect consumers from unqualified and unlicensed contractors and predicted that the decision on a case of first impression creates a loophole in the license requirements by allowing unlicensed contractors to call themselves "construction managers."
