Don't you love it when the Court of Appeal clearly summarizes the case -- and holding -- in two sentences at the outset of the opinion?
I know I do.
Justice Rubin starts today's opinion with:
"May the second-place bidder on a public works contract state a cause of action for
intentional interference with prospective economic advantage against the winning bidder
if the winner was only able to obtain lowest bidder status by illegally paying its workers
less than the prevailing wage? We hold that the answer is yes if the plaintiff alleges it
was the second lowest bidder and therefore would have otherwise been awarded the
contract, because that fact gives rise to a relationship with the public agency that made
plaintiff’s award of the contract reasonably probable."
Pretty clear and concise, eh?
Justice Grimes dissents from the court's conclusion. But I don't think anyone can disagree with the style. It's a great way to start an opinion.
