In 2003, a licensed Arizona contractor, Twin Peaks Construction Inc., contracted with the City of Bisbee to build improvements in a city park. As part of the project, Twin Peaks contracted with Weatherguard Metal Construction to provide a metal ramada.
The City paid Twin Peaks for its services, but Twin Peaks made only a partial payment to Weatherguard.
Weatherguard filed a complaint with the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (ROC), claiming that Twin Peaks’ failure to pay violated A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(11), which requires a contractor to pay a subcontractor “when due for materials or services rendered in connection with the licensee's operations as a contractor.”
At the ensuing hearing, Twin Peaks asked the administrative law judge (ALJ) to dismiss Weatherguard’s claim, arguing that Weatherguard was not properly licensed for the Bisbee project and, thus, per A.R.S. § 32-1153, was not entitled to bring an action to collect for its work. (That statute prohibits unlicensed or improperly licensed contractors from using Arizona courts to collect for work performed.)
The ALJ refused to dismiss Weatherguard’s claim, ruling that § 32-1153 “pertains to actions in civil court, not administrative proceedings” such as an ROC complaint. The ALJ ordered Twin Peaks to pay Weatherguard or risk revocation of its license, and the ROC adopted the ALJ’s order.
Twin Peaks asked for a judicial review in Superior Court, where the order was upheld. Twin Peaks then appealed to the Arizona Court of Appeals, which affirmed the lower court’s ruling and, by extension, the ROC order for Twin Peaks to pay the remaining amount owed to Weatherguard.
(In its ruling, the Arizona Court of Appeals noted that Weatherguard was, in fact, properly licensed at all required times. Nevertheless, the Court took the opportunity to affirm that an unlicensed contractor may utilize the ROC administrative process to enforce collection against a licensed contractor.)
CONCLUSION
The Court of Appeals’ 2007 decision in Twin Peaks Construction v. Weatherguard
is a useful reminder to licensed contractors that, while they may be safe from unlicensed subcontractors’ collection efforts in Arizona courts, they remain vulnerable to the dictates of an ROC proceeding.
| Lang Thal King & Hanson PC
Lang Thal King & Hanson PC is a 2024 Best Law Firms Metro Tier 1 (Scottsdale) selectee for Construction Law, Construction Litigation and Commercial Litigation, and a Tier 2 selectee for Arbitration.
The act of visiting or communicating with Lang Thal King & Hanson PC, via this website or by email does not create an attorney-client relationship. Communications from non-clients are not subject to client confidentiality or attorney-client privilege.
Further, the articles, discussion, commentary, forms and sample documentation contained in this website are offered as general guidance only and are not to be relied upon as specific legal advice. For legal advice on a specific matter, please consult with an attorney who is knowledgeable and experienced in that area. While the articles on this website accurately describe applicable law on the subject covered as of the date of publication, the law continues to develop with the passage of time. Accordingly, care should be taken to verify that the statutes, case law and regulations described have not changed since the article's publication.
The lawyers listed in this website practice law only in the jurisdictions where they are admitted. This website is regulated by the Arizona Rules of Professional Conduct.
Lang Thal King & Hanson construction, litigation and business attorneys represent contractors, subcontractors and general business owners in construction law, contractor licensing, collections and general commercial litigation in the Phoenix area and throughout Arizona.