Chair of the firm’s Construction Litigation practice group, Stephen B. Welch specializes in representation of subcontractors, general contractors, developers and owners in all types of construction disputes. These include claims for construction defects, property damage, breach of contract, delay damages, business interruption, mold contamination and job site injuries.

Trusted Counselor and Risk Manager to Global Construction Clients

Steve represents a major international building industry corporation which owns numerous trade subcontractors and material suppliers throughout the country.  He has managed over 300 cases involving the defense of this client.  In many cases, he has obtained dismissals or nominal settlements for the client.

Focused Representation of Window Manufacturers

He has successfully represented a national window manufacturer and supplier in litigation throughout California, including cases on alleged window failures in both commercial and residential projects.

Reducing Risks for a Major California Grading Contractor

For over 15 years, Steve has represented one of California’s largest residential grading contractors in various litigation matters, including over 50 construction defect cases involving claims of foundation movement, soil subsidence and landslides.  He has obtained dismissals for his client in many cases.

Serving the Petroleum Industry in Construction Dispute Resolution

Steve has represented an international petroleum company in litigation involving construction of oil and gas drill rigs, pipelines and production facilities.

Steve Welch’s represented matters include:

• Construction Defect -  represented the developer of a 140 unit town home project who was sued for construction defects by the Homeowner’s Association.  Steve prepared a motion for summary adjudication on the grounds that the HOA lacked standing to pursue many of the claims in the suit.  A courtesy copy of the motion was submitted to opposing counsel prior to filing with the court.  The plaintiff quickly compromised its claim and a global settlement of all claims was reached shortly thereafter.  Most of the settlement was funded by contributions from the cross-defendant subcontractors.
• Construction Defect -  represented a large residential grading subcontractor in a trial involving foundation movement and soil subsidence at 11 homes in a residential subdivision.  Steve argued that the damages were caused by inadequate foundation design rather than negligent grading of the subject lots.  After a 5 week trial, the jury returned a defense verdict for Steve’s client.  The court awarded the client over $200,000 in attorney fees and costs pursuant to the attorney fee provision in the subcontract.  Steve also represented the client on the appeal of the award which was affirmed by the appellate court.
• Product Liability -  represented a street paving subcontractor in a series of consolidated actions involving alleged improper installation of a street subgrade material at 30 miles of roadway in Contra Costa County.  The plaintiffs were local governments which sought over $25 million in damages to remove and replace all of the roadways.  Steve brought a motion for summary adjudication on the grounds that some claims were barred by the statute of limitations and others were barred by the terms of a prior release.  Steve also provided evidence that the roadway problems were caused by a defective base material rather than installation error.  A global settlement was reached in which Steve’s client paid approximately 1% of a multi-million settlement.
• Commercial Litigation -  represented an international petroleum company in an action to recover $30 million in cost overruns for the construction of two off-shore oil platforms in Venezuela.  The action was a “fast track” arbitration proceeding which involved dozens of witnesses and over 100,000 documents.  All pre-arbitration discovery was completed in 2 months.  A favorable settlement was reached after a 6 week arbitration.
• Personal Injury -  brought motions for summary judgment on behalf of the general contractor in two different construction site personal injury actions on the grounds that no duty of care was owed by the client to the injured employee of an independent subcontractor.  Both motions were granted and both clients were dismissed from the actions.