Bergman & Dacey, Inc. achieves each client’s goals by relying on over two decades of extensive experience representing public and private construction project owners, general contractors, subcontractors, and sureties.

Bergman & Dacey, Inc. repeatedly extricates clients from lawsuits involving private and public works construction projects before they have to respond to a lawsuit. We write strongly worded demand letters, containing well-reasoned arguments explaining why a complaint is without merit, which often results in dismissal of the lawsuit before a responsive pleading is due.

Bergman & Dacey, Inc. has resolved hundreds of construction matters, both private and public works, by getting the other side to an early mediation. At mediation, we strategically gain leverage to obtain economically, favorable settlements for our clients. Early resolution through mediation frequently results in significant savings in potential attorney fees and costs.

Bergman & Dacey, Inc. often obtains stipulated judgments against defendant contractors who wish to avoid trial. We negotiated such settlements in areas as diverse as a freeway project, a U.S. Navy Housing project, high school projects, and a museum project. These types of settlements may include up-front amounts, payment schedules, and an executed stipulated fraud judgment held in trust to be filed in the event of nonpayment.

Bergman & Dacey, Inc. successfully represents public entity owners and general contractors in administrative hearings in connection with issues ranging from bid protests, substitution of listed subcontractors, contractor licensing, assignment of subcontract, prevailing wage violations, and penalties for alleged statutory violations of the Public Contract Code, the Labor Code and the Business and Professions Code. Our vast experience on behalf of clients on both sides of these issues makes us extremely effective.

Bergman & Dacey, Inc. has extensive experience representing public entities and private contractors in disputes arising under the California Labor Code’s provisions governing the payment of prevailing wages on public works construction projects. Our experience includes assisting public entity labor compliance officers in their investigation of Labor Code compliance, the determination, recovery, and disbursement of back wages and statutory penalties, and the representation of public entities in review hearings before the Department of Industrial Relations and writ proceedings at the trial and appellate court levels.

Bergman & Dacey, Inc. represents multiple school and college districts, and various fire districts, sanitary districts, water districts, cities, and counties within the State of California. We handle a wide variety of matters on behalf of our clients, including contractor licensing, bidding, and substitution of subcontractor issues, stop notice enforcement actions, claims for breach of contract, delay, disruption, acceleration, wrongful termination, contractor abandonment, fraud, false claims, prevailing wage violations, statutory penalties and interest, and other statutory claims. Our efforts to limit the public entity's litigation expenses, while providing the necessary services, are designed to protect our client's interests. We aggressively advocate our clients' interests, while always remaining vigilant in seeking settlement opportunities.
The following matters are representative of the results we routinely achieve for our public entity clients:

In addition to representing public entities in the area of construction, Bergman & Dacey, Inc. handles a wide variety of matters on behalf of private clients, including general contractors, subcontractors and owners. The following matters are representative of the types of matters we handle, and the results we routinely achieve for our private clients:

We first represented our client in an administrative hearing under the Public Contract Code when the structural steel subcontractor sued for $2.5 million after being removed from the project. Our client and its surety cross-complained against the steel subcontractor and its performance bond surety. The case settled eleven days before trial with our clients receiving $750,000.00 and paying out nothing.

Bergman & Dacey, Inc. also successfully handled two separate trials arising from the Museum of Science and Industry project. When the subcontractors initiated actions against our client seeking delay, disruption, and acceleration damages, (with the assistance of consultants and experts) we objectively evaluated and assessed both cases. In the first trial, the plaintiff sought over $3.3 million and was awarded only $131,000.00. By way of post-trial motions, our client was awarded $511,000.00 in attorneys’ fees and associated costs. After deducting plaintiff’s award, a new judgment of $380,000.00 was entered in our client’s favor. We obtained a similar result for our client in the second trial. Seeking $1.8 million against our client, the plaintiff recovered only $69,000.00. Through post-trial motions, our client was awarded $350,000.00 in attorneys’ fees and costs, resulting in a new judgment of $281,000.00 entered in our client’s favor.

• Bergman & Dacey, Inc. represented a general contractor in a dispute regarding the Roosmoor Leisure World Project. We were able to defeat the defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (the defendant claimed that the general contractor’s claims were barred by the statute of limitations) by demonstrating the new claims related back to the previously filed claims.
  
  
  
• In a breach of statutory duty/fraudulent conveyance action arising out of a construction project, Bergman & Dacey, Inc. obtained an assignment of rights on behalf of our client and successfully pursued the causes of action on behalf of our client against a bank. Our client recovered monies it was not aware it had any right to pursue.
  
  
• Bergman & Dacey, Inc. successfully resolved a construction defect litigation dispute on a multi-building project by obtaining a dismissal of the general contractor from the action by way of a motion for sanctions against the subcontractor’s frivolous pleading.
  
  
• In a construction contract dispute involving a subcontractor’s stop notice claim against the owner, Bergman & Dacey, Inc. negotiated a settlement on behalf of the owner wherein our client received reimbursement for all of its attorney’s fees incurred in the stop notice action, even though the contract between the owner and the general contractor did not have an attorney’s fees provision.
  
  
• Bergman & Dacey, Inc. successfully resolved an indemnity claim made by a private owner’s title insurance company against our client, the general contractor, by cross-complaining against the title company and the owner for recision and/or reformation of the indemnity agreement.
  
  
• Bergman & Dacey, Inc. obtained judgments on behalf of a general contractor against three separate subcontractors, all based on promissory estoppel causes of action. Each of the three subcontractors submitted bids on which the prime contractor relied, and then refused to sign subcontracts with the general contractor. We successfully recovered the difference between the bids and the replacement subcontracts for the general contractor.
  
  
• Bergman & Dacey, Inc. settled two separate actions to foreclose mechanics’ liens brought on behalf of our client who had construction contracts with lessees of commercial property. In each case, after the lessee breached its lease with the property owner, Bergman & Dacey, Inc. recovered against the property owner despite the fact that the property owner posted Notices of Non-Responsibility.
  
  
• Bergman & Dacey, Inc. obtained two defense verdicts and a successful resolution for one of its general contracting clients and its bonding companies when a subcontractor sought recovery of damages against the payment and stop notice release bond sureties. Bergman & Dacey, Inc. obtained defense verdicts as to both surety companies, received a defense verdict on the quantum meruit cause of action, and prevailed on a trial motion which knocked out $500,000.00 in alleged “cost of borrowing” damages.
  
  
• Bergman & Dacey, Inc. recovered several hundred thousand dollars from a subcontractor on behalf of our client, a joint venture general contractor regarding a Federal Navy Housing Project in San Diego which was presented as a breach of contract action. Bergman & Dacey, Inc. filed suit on behalf of the general contractor and shortly thereafter moved for summary judgment. The subcontractor then agreed to a stipulated judgment and a payment plan before the summary judgment motion was heard by the court.
  
  
• Bergman & Dacey, Inc. successfully enforced a “pay if paid” clause in favor of a general contractor against claims made by one of its subcontractors when the owner of a housing project refused to pay for certain extra work and release the contract balance to the general contractor. The subcontractor claimed it was entitled to payment from the general contractor for extra work even though the owner had not paid. Bergman & Dacey, Inc. convinced the court that the general contractor’s “pay if paid” clause made payment from the owner a condition precedent to the general contractor’s obligations to pay the subcontractor. (This case was decided before the California Supreme Court decision in Wm. R. Clarke v. Safeco.)
  
  
• Bergman & Dacey, Inc. successfully convinced a court to sustain a demurrer to a complaint, without leave to amend, on a claim against the payment bond. The court agreed with Bergman & Dacey, Inc.’s position that the plaintiff failed to provide the preliminary notice required by statute. Therefore, the plaintiff did not preserve its right to sue on the bond. The court also awarded our client attorneys’ fees and costs.
  
  
• In a private works, high-end remodel construction project, Bergman and Dacey, Inc. was able to obtain a 100% recovery on behalf of the general contractor against the owner in an arbitration for an award of $370,655.58. Although the owner put forth many defenses, including over-billing, delay in progress of the work, and that the contract was modified by conduct, Bergman and Dacey, Inc. was able to obtain a ruling from the Arbitrator finding in our client’s favor on each of those defenses. Bergman and Dacey, Inc. has filed post-award briefs seeking costs, attorneys’ fees as the prevailing party, statutory penalties, and interest.