California Supreme Court Limits a Direct Contractor’s Ability to Withhold Money from Subcontractors

The California Supreme Court recently provided a significant win for subcontractor prompt payment rights.  The court unanimously held in the case of United Riggers & Erectors, Inc. v. Coast Iron & Steel Co., that the direct contractor may only delay payment to its subcontractors when there is a good faith dispute regarding the sufficiency of the subcontractor’s performance of the work that is directly related to the monies that are being held. Specifically, the case clarified what constitutes a good faith dispute that allows an owner or direct contractor to withhold payment under prompt payment laws.

Under most prompt payment statutes, the party who is supposed to make payment may withhold 150% of any amount in dispute from the sums that the party otherwise would be required to pay.  Over the past decade, there were two conflicting lines of appellate cases with regard to what constitutes the type of dispute for which funds may be withheld.

One line of cases, including Martin Brothers Construction, Inc. v. Thompson Pacific Construction, Inc., interpreted the withholding language very broadly and held that any dispute, of any kind, would justify withholding of payment.  Under these cases, even an affirmative claim (such as a request for a change order) by the party seeking payment could justify withholding of payment of undisputed amounts.

The second line of cases interpreted the withholding language more narrowly.  Under this line of cases, which included East West Bank v. Rio School Dist., the courts held that withholding retention is only justified by disputes related to the retention’s security function.

The California Supreme Court ruling in United Riggers & Erectors, Inc. v. Coast Iron & Steel Co., resolved the conflict between these two lines of cases.  The Supreme Court decided to follow the line of cases that more narrowly interpreted the statutory withholding language and disapproved Martin Brothers.

The facts of the case were straightforward.  On a project for Universal Studios, Coast Iron subcontracted to United Riggers the installation of the fabricated metalwork.  The work was done to everyone’s satisfaction.

Universal Studios paid retention to Coast Iron, but Coast Iron failed to pay United Riggers retention that had been withheld from its progress payments.  Coast Iron had continued to withhold retention from United Riggers because Coast Iron was aware of substantial claims that United Riggers had against Coast Iron relating to other aspects of the job.  United Riggers demanded the balance of its original contract, increased expenses which it attributed to Coast Iron’s mismanagement, and another sum for outstanding change order requests.

United Riggers argued that because the base contract work was completed satisfactorily, Coast Iron was obligated, at a minimum, to pay the uncontested base contract balance, including the retention.  The Supreme Court agreed and determined that Coast Iron had wrongfully withheld payment and held that United Riggers was entitled to recover interest, prompt payment penalties, and attorney’s fees, stating that:

The dispute exception excuses payment only when a good faith dispute exists over a statutory or contractual precondition to that payment, such as the adequacy of the construction work for which the payment is consideration. Controversies concerning unrelated work or additional payments above the amount both sides agree is owed will not excuse delay; a direct contractor cannot withhold payment where the underlying obligation to pay those specific monies is undisputed. 

In other words, the court stated that base contract progress payments and retention can only be withheld if the dispute deals with work in the original contract or the retention itself.

Recent Posts

WPCCA ConstructConnect Live Demo

Join us for a live demo with ConstructConnect, the leading preconstruction platform that helps commercial construction professionals find more projects, bid smarter, and work faster. Date: Tuesday, November 18, 2025 Time: 11:00am – 12:00pm Location: via Zoom Key Takeaways: Access 750,000+ active…

October 8, 2025

WPCCA AI for Personal Productivity & Firm Transformation Workshop

In this fast-paced, hands-on workshop, AI consultant Stjepan Mikulic will help you turn AI into measurable results—both personally and across your entire firm. You’ll learn how to create custom GPTs, use AI to build presentations, visuals, and reports. Then, we’ll…

September 24, 2025

WPCCA Document Crunch Live Demo

Join us for a live demo of Document Crunch, the industry’s leading AI-powered risk platform built to simplify complex contracts and project documents, accelerate decision-making, and keep projects moving forward. Document Crunch empowers your team to quickly review contracts, specifications,…

September 10, 2025

WPCCA 3 Pillars of AI Implementation Webinar

Join us for an engaging presentation with Stjepan Mikulic, founder of AI in AEC, a global training provider serving architects, engineers, and construction professionals in more than 60 countries. Stjepan will explore the three key aspects every firm must navigate…

August 21, 2025

What Employers Need to Know About No Tax on Overtime

On July 3, 2025, the U.S. House of Representatives narrowly passed H.R.1, the so-called “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” ending a dramatic journey through Congress that dominated headlines in recent weeks. The Act includes several provisions related to campaign promises…

July 23, 2025
MORE STORIES