UPDATE: Oral Arguments Completed Before Colorado Supreme Court
On Wednesday, November 19, 2025, BHGR partner Rudy Verner presented oral arguments before the Colorado Supreme Court on behalf of Ralph L. Wadsworth Construction Company. The hearing marked a significant milestone in this case involving RTD’s N Line commuter rail project.
What Happens Now
The case is now under advisement as the justices deliberate on the issues presented. The timing of the Court’s decision is uncertain, as the Supreme Court issues opinions on its own schedule, depending on the complexity of the cases before it.
We will continue to monitor the case closely and provide updates when the Court releases its decision. Given the precedential nature of these issues, the ruling could have significant ramifications for contractors, subcontractors, and project owners involved in public works construction throughout Colorado.
On March 24, 2025, the Colorado Supreme Court announced that it will answer two important questions about Colorado’s Public Works Act, which could have far-reaching implications for the construction industry. Specifically, in Ralph L Wadsworth Construction Co v Regional Rail Partners, 2024SC000537, the Court will decide:
-
- Whether a claimant who files an excessive verified statement of claim under the Colorado Public Works Act [1] forfeits both its statutory remedies and all other available legal remedies or, as with an excessive lien claimant under the General Mechanics’ Lien Act,[2] forfeits its statutory remedies only.
-
- Whether a verified statement of claim under the Colorado Public Works Act may lawfully include disputed amounts, such as additional costs incurred by a subcontractor due to project delays and disruptions, or whether such claims are limited to undisputed, liquidated amounts.
The Colorado Supreme Court’s decision on these issues will affect all subcontractors, material suppliers, and other businesses who file a verified statement of claim going forward under the Public Works Act. Moreover, because the General Mechanics’ Lien Act and the Colorado Public Works Act share a common purpose, the Court may, in comparing the acts or taking guidance from its prior rulings regarding the General Mechanics’ Lien Act, signal changes ahead for mechanics’ lien filings as well. It may be a year or more before the Supreme Court issues its final opinion on these issues.
BHGR represents the subcontractor in this dispute.
Attorneys Giovanni Ruscitti, Rudy Verner, Jack Storti, and Larry Myers represent the client in the Supreme Court.
References
[1] Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 38-26-101 to -110.
[2] Colo. Rev. Stat. §§38-22-101 to -133.