Colorado Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Boulder Law Firm's Client

Berg Hill Greenleaf Ruscitti LLP successfully argued a case with significant implications for contractors and subcontractors in the state.

Apr. 9, 2026 at 9:08pm

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A photorealistic studio still life featuring a stack of construction blueprints, a hardhat, and a tape measure, symbolizing the abstract concepts of legal disputes and project management in the construction industry.A legal victory for a Colorado construction firm highlights the complexities of public works disputes and the importance of fair dispute resolution processes.Boulder Today

The Colorado Supreme Court unanimously reversed an appeals court ruling, siding with Berg Hill Greenleaf Ruscitti LLP's client, Ralph L. Wadsworth Construction Co. LLC, in a case involving a $343 million public works project. The court's decision clarifies that subcontractors can include disputed claims for damages and costs in their verified statements of claim without fear of forfeiting all legal recourse, and that general contractors and project owners cannot use excessive-claim penalties to strip claimants of all legal remedies.

Why it matters

This ruling has important implications for contractors, subcontractors, and material suppliers working on public projects in Colorado. It establishes that subcontractors can seek recovery for a broader range of costs and damages without risking complete forfeiture of their claims, and it limits the ability of general contractors and project owners to use procedural arguments to avoid resolving disputes on the merits.

The details

The case arose from Wadsworth's work as a subcontractor on the Regional Transportation District's North Metro Rail Line project in the Denver area. After experiencing significant delays and disruptions, Wadsworth filed a verified statement of claim with RTD under the Public Works Act seeking $12.8 million in unpaid costs, including delay and disruption damages. The general contractor challenged the claim as excessive, and the trial court initially ruled in Wadsworth's favor, awarding over $5.6 million. However, the Court of Appeals reversed that decision, concluding that Wadsworth's claim was excessive as a matter of law and that the company had forfeited its right to recovery. The Colorado Supreme Court has now unanimously overturned the appeals court ruling, finding that disputed or unliquidated amounts can be included in a verified statement of claim as long as they fall within the statutory constraints of the Public Works Act.

  • The Colorado Supreme Court issued its ruling on Monday, April 7, 2026.
  • The initial lawsuit was filed after Wadsworth experienced significant delays and disruptions on the $343 million North Metro Rail Line project.

The players

Berg Hill Greenleaf Ruscitti LLP

A Boulder, Colorado-based law firm that successfully represented Ralph L. Wadsworth Construction Co. LLC in the case before the Colorado Supreme Court.

Ralph L. Wadsworth Construction Co. LLC

A construction company that served as a subcontractor on the North Metro Rail Line project and filed a verified statement of claim seeking $12.8 million in unpaid costs.

Regional Transportation District (RTD)

The public agency overseeing the $343 million North Metro Rail Line project, which connected Thornton and Denver's Union Station.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“The decision confirms that a verified statement of claim is a broad protective remedy. Subcontractors may include good-faith claims for delay damages, disruption costs, and other disputed amounts without fear that doing so will render the claim excessive, as long as those amounts relate to labor, materials, or other supplies used in the prosecution of the work and the claimant has a reasonable basis for believing the amounts are due.”

— Giovanni Ruscitti, Partner, Berg Hill Greenleaf Ruscitti LLP

“For general contractors and project owners, the decision clarifies that the excessive-claim penalty is a targeted deterrent against bad-faith filings, not a trap that strips a claimant of all legal recourse. This should encourage resolution of disputes on the merits rather than through procedural forfeiture arguments.”

— Jack Storti, Partner, Berg Hill Greenleaf Ruscitti LLP

What’s next

The Colorado Supreme Court's ruling sets an important precedent that will guide future disputes between contractors, subcontractors, and project owners on public works projects in the state.

The takeaway

This case highlights the importance of clear and fair dispute resolution processes in the construction industry, ensuring that subcontractors and other parties can seek recovery for legitimate claims without fear of losing all legal recourse. The Colorado Supreme Court's decision reinforces the rights of contractors and subcontractors while also providing guidance to project owners on the appropriate use of excessive-claim penalties.