Legal Question in Construction Law in California

Re: E-mail Communications

On and after January 1, 2000, California law has allowed a broad range of contract transactions to be done by electronic means with binding effect. The law is called the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act" and is codified at Civil Code sections 1633.1 - 1633.17.

Because there are many exceptions written into this law, it's not really possible to say that your e-mail communications resulted in legally binding contracts or contract modifications. Not only would your e-mail exchanges have to fall within the range of contracts permissible under the UETA, they would have to meet the usual contract-law requirements (offer, acceptance, consideration, etc.).

So, I think the safe course is to assume that e-mail exchanges MIGHT result in binding contractual obligations per se. Furthermore, your e-mail exchanges might also be admissible as evidence to establish how an otherwise vague, incomplete or missing contract term should be construed (or supplied) by the court.

An attorney would have to review the entire contractor-subcontractor relationship to advise you with accuracy.....but as a starting point, I would say if the exchanges look like they contain an offer and an acceptance, and there is a consideration mentioned, there is a pretty good chance they will be enforceable even if lacking autograph signatures or other formalities of a traditional written contract.

If, on the other hand, the parties were clearly only engaging in negotiations, there is probably no enforceable contract.