In the recent CA appellate decision, Pacific Caisson & Shoring, Inc., v. Bernards Bros. Inc. #B248320, the justices ruled against Pacific’s claim for compensation from Bernards.

The reasoning was that Pacific’s license was suspended for 77 days during the time Pacific was doing the work, which lasted 18 months. Pacific claimed the suspension was unfair, because the suspension occurred when the RMO for Pacific had another license he was RMO for suspended for failure to pay benefits to a union trust.

The justices decided that Pacific had not acted reasonably and in good faith to maintain proper licensure, because its RMO had not taken proper care of the responsibilities regarding the other license.