Brutoco Engineering & Construction, Inc. v. Superior Court

This action involves the procedure to be followed in a contractual arbitration between the Department of Transportation of the State of California (State) and a private party or parties, as governed by the Public Contract Code. We find that the trial court correctly declined to consider proposed arbitrators who have not been certified by the Public Works Contract Arbitration Committee, and instead confined itself to persons on that list or panel. Accordingly, we will deny the petition.

Statement of Facts

Petitioner Brutoco Engineering & Construction, Inc. (Brutoco) was the prime contractor on a state highway project. Real party in interest United Engineering Technology, Inc. (United), a subcontractor, asked Brutoco to submit a claim to the State on a “pass-through” basis for an additional $453,867.54. The claim was denied, and United duly filed a complaint in arbitration against the State, naming Brutoco as a real party in interest. Brutoco answered, and also filed a cross-complaint against the State for implied indemnity, declaratory relief, and “equitable apportionment of fault.”

The parties made efforts to agree on an arbitrator, but without success. The State then…