Without A License, Contractor Worked For Nothing.

A tribal corporation brought suit against a contractor for the return of funds it paid for work, alleging the contractor was not licensed. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the tribal corporation. The Court of Appeal found the trial court abused its discretion when it summarily sustained all 39 of the tribal corporation’s objections to the contractor’s evidence, stating that when a court issues a blanket ruling on numerous evidentiary objections without providing any reasoning there is no meaningful basis for review. Nonetheless, the trial court’s error made no difference in the outcome for the contractor. The contractor claimed a license was not required for performing work on tribal land, that he should be given equity, that there was a triable issue of fact whether he was licensed, that he substantially complied with the license requirement and that the tribal corporation should be estopped from making its claims. None of the contractor’s arguments were successful, and the appellate court affirmed. Twenty-Nine Palms Enterprises Corporation v. Bardos   (Cal. App. Fourth Dist., Div. 2;  November 8, 2012) 210 Cal.App.4th 1435.