Southland Holdings (SLND) faces $57M judgment in American Bridge case
Rhea-AI Filing Summary
Southland Holdings, Inc. disclosed that its wholly owned subsidiary American Bridge Company received an adverse trial court ruling related to construction of the Washington State Convention Center. On January 15, 2026, a King County, Washington court entered a judgment in favor of Clark/Lewis Joint Venture and against American Bridge and certain sureties, jointly and severally, for a principal amount of approximately $57 million.
American Bridge strongly disagrees with the decision and plans to appeal, but there is no assurance the appeal will succeed. Southland is working with its term loan agent, Callodine Commercial Finance, LLC, and the lenders under its Credit Agreement to assess how this judgment affects its debt arrangements. The company is also analyzing how the ruling will impact its accounting and financial reporting.
Positive
- None.
Negative
- Adverse litigation outcome: Trial court entered an approximately $57 million judgment against American Bridge Company and certain sureties, creating a significant potential liability.
- Financing and reporting uncertainty: Southland is working with term loan lenders and reviewing accounting and financial reporting impacts, indicating possible pressure on its Credit Agreement and financial position.
Insights
$57M judgment creates legal and credit pressure for Southland.
The disclosure centers on a trial court judgment of approximately
American Bridge plans to appeal and states it believes the ruling is not supported by law or evidence, but the company explicitly notes there is no assurance the appeal will be successful. At the same time, Southland is working with Callodine Commercial Finance, LLC and lenders under its Term Loan and Security Agreement, and is evaluating accounting and financial reporting impacts. These steps indicate the judgment may affect debt covenants, leverage, or liquidity, though specific outcomes are not detailed in the disclosure.
For investors, the key elements are the size of the judgment, the uncertainty around the appeal, and the ongoing discussions under the Credit Agreement. Future periodic reports or additional current reports are likely to clarify how the judgment is reflected on the balance sheet and whether any amendments or waivers under the term loan are needed.
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM
CURRENT REPORT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported):
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Charter)
| (State or Other Jurisdiction | (Commission | (IRS Employer | ||
| of Incorporation) | File Number) | Identification No.) |
(Address of Principal Executive Offices) (Zip Code)
(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)
Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions (see General Instruction A.2. below):
| Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425) | |
| Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12) | |
| Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b)) | |
| Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e 4(c)) |
Securities registered pursuant to section 12(b) of the Act:
| Title of each class | Trading Symbol(s) | Name of each exchange on which registered | ||
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an emerging growth company as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act of 1933 (§230.405 of this chapter) or Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (§240.12b-2 of this chapter).
Emerging growth company
If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act.
Item 8.01 Other Events.
American Bridge Company (“American Bridge”), a wholly owned subsidiary of Southland Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”), received an adverse ruling in the case of American Bridge Company v. Clark/Lewis Joint Venture, et al. The case relates to the construction of the Washington State Convention Center by American Bridge. In this litigation, the trial court in King County, Washington, by order dated January 15, 2026, ruled in favor of Clark/Lewis Joint Venture and entered a judgment against American Bridge and certain of its sureties, jointly and severally, in the total principal amount of approximately $57 million.
American Bridge strongly disagrees with the trial court’s decision and believes that the judgment is not supported by the law or the evidence presented at trial. Accordingly, American Bridge intends to appeal the ruling. While American Bridge intends to vigorously challenge and seek reversal of the ruling, there can be no assurances that American Bridge’s intended appeal will be successful.
The Company is actively working with Callodine Commercial Finance, LLC, as agent, and the lenders party to the Term Loan and Security Agreement dated September 30, 2024, as amended by the First Amendment dated March 3, 2025 (the “Credit Agreement”) to determine the impact of the adverse ruling on the Credit Agreement. In addition, the Company is actively analyzing the accounting and financial reporting impacts of the adverse ruling.
1
SIGNATURE
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.
| Dated: January 22, 2026 | SOUTHLAND HOLDINGS, INC. | ||
| By: | /s/ Frank S. Renda | ||
| Name: | Frank S. Renda | ||
| Title: | President and Chief Executive Officer | ||
2
FAQ
What did Southland Holdings (SLND) disclose in this 8-K?
How large is the judgment against American Bridge Company?
Does Southland Holdings plan to appeal the $57 million ruling?
How could the judgment affect Southland Holdings’ debt arrangements?
What accounting and financial reporting steps is Southland taking in response?
Which project is involved in the American Bridge litigation?
