Nowell A. Lantz, Attorney

Nowell A. Lantz practices in the areas of construction law, business litigation, and government and regulatory. Mr. Lantz’s practice has included representing clients in public and private works disputes, including claims for delay, extra work, and foreclosure on mechanic’s liens and stop notices. Mr. Lantz also handles federal, state, and local bid protests, subcontractor listing and substitution issues, California Air Resources Board and local Air Pollution Control matters, and general business litigation. Mr. Lantz also practices probate litigation, including representing trustees and beneficiaries in a variety of claims, and representing clients in non-trust related probate matters, such as pursuing will contests. The scope of his representation includes all aspects of litigation from complaint filing through jury trial and judgment collection.

Mr. Lantz is admitted to practice before all California state courts and the United States District Courts for the Central and Southern Districts of California, and is a member of the Wallace Inn of Court. He received his juris doctor from the University of San Diego School of Law, from which he graduated cum laude and was made a member of the Order of the Coif. While in law school, Mr. Lantz was a member of the San Diego Law Review and received CALI (AmJur) Awards in five courses. Mr. Lantz received his Bachelor of Arts in Legal Studies from the University of California at Berkeley, where he was active in Pi Kappa Alpha. He also earned the rank of Eagle Scout from the Boy Scouts of America in 1996.

Bar Admissions

  • California (state courts)
  • U.S. District Courts of California (Central and Southern)

Education

  • J.D., Cum Laude, Law Review, Order of the Coif – University of San Diego
  • B.A., Legal Studies – University of California at Berkeley

Areas of Practice

Representative Experience

Bid Protest – Army Corps of Engineers

2011: The firm represented a large prime contractor specializing in Federal work in a bid protest against the Army Corps. of Engineers. The protest, on a proposal for $500 million worth of work on various Federal Installations, was based on the Army Corps’ improper rejection of a submittal in violation of its own specifications and applicable law. The firm prepared a bid protest and provided supporting cases and analysis to support the bid protest and discussions, ultimately resulting in the acceptance of the contractor’s submittal.

Breach of Trust and Surcharge Petition Against Corporate Fiduciary

2011: Petitioned for breach of trust, removal, and surcharge against a corporate trustee, succeeding in compelling a multi-million dollar distribution and resolving the dispute in a settlement favorable to the firm’s client.

Sprotte + Watson Architecture & Planning, Inc. v. Santee School District et al. San Diego Superior Court Case No. 37-2009-00083936-CU-CO-CTL

2010: The dispute involved a nine school site construction project at a local school district, valued at over $100 million. After terminating the architect for convenience, the school district was sued for payment owed, lost profits, and bad faith termination. The architect also sued the former assistant superintendent personally for intentional interference with its contract. The matter culminated in a three and a half week jury trial in which the firm represented the local school district and was successful in excluding the claims for lost profits and bad faith termination, and the allegations against the individual district employee, totaling approximately $1.3 million. The firm also secured a jury verdict for damages against the negligent architect, and partially defended the claims for outstanding payments.

Contested Petition for Construction of Trust

2010: Successfully petitioned for a construction of the decedent’s trust which resulted in several millions of dollars passing to the firm’s client. Overcoming allegations that the trust language directed one-half of the trust residue pass to another beneficiary, the firm used extrinsic evidence to show the decedent’s true intent was that the entire trust residue pass to the firm’s client.

Estate of Mary Alward Taylor San Diego Superior Court Case No. 37-2008-00152011-PR-PW-CTL

2009: The firm initiated a contest of a purported holographic codicil and successfully negotiated a settlement resulting in the firm’s client receiving the full amount she was entitled to receive under the decedent’s formal will.

In Re: the Harriet Kopp Trust San Diego Superior Court Case No. 37-2008-00152626-PR-TR-CTL

2009: The firm successfully petitioned the Court for a construction of the decedent’s trust which will result in over $4,000,000.00 passing to the firm’s client. Overcoming allegations that the trust language directed one-half of the trust residue pass to another beneficiary, the firm used extrinsic evidence to show the decedent’s true intent was that the entire trust residue pass to the firm’s client.

Johnson, Barnes & Finch, Inc. v. Meier Pacific, Inc. et al. San Diego Superior Court Case No. GIC881652

2008: Numerous subcontractors initiated litigation against the firm’s general contractor client and the project owner to collect subcontract balances. The firm’s client asserted the pass through claims for unpaid contract balance and for additional overhead to build the project, which was completed over one year behind schedule. The project owner countered with a delay claim and other claims. Through a series of negotiations, settlement conferences, and mediation just prior to a jury trial, the firm’s client was paid on its claim for additional compensation, and received full indemnity from the owner for all subcontractor suits.

Will Contest

2008: Initiated a contest of a purported holographic codicil and successfully negotiated a settlement resulting in the firm’s client receiving the full amount she was entitled to receive under the decedent’s formal will.

Kims v. Rowley et al. San Diego Superior Court Case No. GIC 845277

2006: Two week jury trial regarding private work of improvement resulting in 9-3 defense verdict in favor of firm's client on complaint seeking disgorgement of over $800,000.00 for alleged unlicensed contractor work. Last pre-trial offer by firm’s client was to pay $5,000.00 to settle.

J.B. Riha Corporation v. Andrew and Mary Connors-Nicholls San Diego Superior Court Case No. GIC841028

2006: Three week jury trial regarding private work of improvement resulting in 11-0 verdict in favor of firm's contractor client on complaint, and zero recovery on $1,000,000.00 cross-complaint of property owner opponent (including claims for punitive damages) against both contractor and project manager.