FRAMING EXPERT WITNESS ROOFING MEMBRANE EXPERT WITNESS CONCRETE EXPERT WITNESS ROOFING MEMBRANE EXPERT WITNESS GRAYLING ALASKA ALASKA ALASKA ALASKA ALASKA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

The Failure to Pursue a Construction Lien Does Not Create a “Gotcha” Argument

October 06, 2025 — David Adelstein - Florida Construction Legal Updates
Just because a party does not pursue its lien rights, or waives it lien rights, or satisfies its lien, does NOT mean the party is foreclosed of its other rights, such as breach of contract or unjust enrichment. Florida’s Construction Lien Law even states that it is “cumulative to other existing remedies and nothing contained in this party shall be construed to prevent any lien or assignee under any contract from maintaining an action thereon at law in like manner as if he or she had no lien for the security of his or her debt, and the bringing of such action shall not prejudice his or her rights under this part, except as herein otherwise expressly provided.” See Fla. Stat. s. 713.30. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

---

Los Angeles Office Secures Summary Judgment for Electric Company Client in Asbestos Lawsuit

August 18, 2025 — Lewis Brisbois Newsroom
Los Angeles, Calif. (July 22, 2025) - Los Angeles Partner Rod Cappy recently obtained summary judgment for his electric company client in a lawsuit brought by an electrician who claimed he developed mesothelioma in part due to exposure to asbestos-containing products distributed by the client. The plaintiff filed his lawsuit in October 2024, alleging that he developed mesothelioma due to occupational exposure to asbestos and asbestos-containing products sold by a slew of companies during his career as an electrician, first in the U.S. Navy from 1964-1967 and then in private industry from 1967-2001. He claimed that he was exposed to asbestos-containing electronic products distributed by Lewis Brisbois’ client to two of his employers. The plaintiff’s demand as to the client was in the mid-six figures. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

---

General Commercial Liability Coverage Depends on Facts - Not Labels

October 27, 2025 — Michael Yelle - Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
The Twiggs hired Rainier Pacific Development, LLC to build a home. But, after the home was complete, the Twiggs complained the concrete garage slab was sloped toward the house and cracked.[1] The Twiggs and Rainier agreed to a “Repair Agreement” (in other words, a contract) that obligated Rainier to repair the slab by applying a thin concrete overlay.[2] The Twiggs alleged the repairs were defective and proceeded to arbitration. In arbitration, the Twiggs made a claim for breach of contract by alleging Rainier had breached the Repair Agreement.[3] The arbitrator ruled in favor of the Twiggs, and a trial court entered judgment against Rainier. When the Twiggs’ efforts to collect on the judgment were unsuccessful, the Twiggs sued Rainier’s commercial general liability insurer, Admiral Insurance Group.[4] Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Michael Yelle, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
Mr. Yelle may be contacted at michael.yelle@acslawyers.com

---

Los Angeles Team Obtains Favorable Verdict for Client in High-Stakes Slip-and-Fall Case

August 05, 2025 — Lewis Brisbois Newsroom
Los Angeles, Calif. (June 26, 2025) - Los Angeles Partners Demian Casey and David B. Shapiro recently obtained a favorable verdict for a property owner client in a high-stakes slip-and-fall case in which the plaintiff had sought an eight-figure award. In the case, the plaintiff suffered an ankle fracture after a slip and fall on the client’s property. The plaintiff, who had hardware implants placed in his ankle as a result of the slip and fall, was also diagnosed with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) after the incident. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

---

Well-Insulated: Predict the Unpredictable Construction Costs

September 15, 2025 — Jill Masur - Construction Executive
It’s clear that, at least for the next year or more, the construction industry can expect unpredictable cost variations. What can construction companies do to insulate against cost fluctuations? How can they mitigate risks related to supply-chain issues, labor shortages, and increased cost and decreased availability of materials and labor? Here are six strategies construction contractors and subcontractors can adopt now to help minimize the impact of these economic uncertainties. 1. Consider price-escalation clauses or cost-plus contracts, both of which allow the contractor to pass increasing material and labor costs on to their customers. Price-escalation clauses have typically been limited to cost increases for materials, but construction contractors can also use them to mitigate the risk of rising labor costs. This is an acute issue today, given the labor shortages and wage increases in the industry. Customers may try to negotiate out of price-escalation clauses, but the demand for their services means contractors have some leverage to push back against those demands–or contractors may need to be creative in negotiating price-escalation clauses. Reprinted courtesy of Jill Masur, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

---

Washington Court of Appeals Narrows Arbitrator Authority in Construction Dispute

November 21, 2025 — Joshua Lane - Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
In a recent opinion, Division III of the Washington Court of Appeals clarified arbitrator limits in Reecer Creek Excavating v. SRI-Rochlin Construction JV,[1] holding that consequential damage waivers are enforceable, fee-shifting depends on who “substantially prevails,” and arbitration awards can be vacated only in narrow circumstances. Reecer Creek Excavating (“Reecer”) was subcontracted by SRI-Rochlin Construction JV (“SRI”) to perform excavation and paving work on a housing development in Ellensburg, Washington. When payment disputes arose, both parties filed breach-of-contract claims and later agreed to private arbitration. Their arbitration agreement included terms mandating that “the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and costs” and providing for an exception to the finality of the award where the arbitrator exceeded its authority. After a multi-day arbitration, the arbitrator found both parties partly at fault - Reecer for incomplete and defective work, and SRI for withholding certain payments. The net award favored Reecer by about $55,000, with each side ordered to bear its own attorney’s fees. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Joshua Lane, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
Mr. Lane may be contacted at joshua.lane@acslawyers.com

---

Court Resolves Disagreement on the Amount of the Deductible

December 02, 2025 — Tred R. Eyerly - Insurance Law Hawaii
After a windstorm caused damage to the insured’s building and repair materials, the court sided with the insured in determining the amount of the deductible. Semaho, Inc. v. AMCO Ins. Co., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 193521 (D. Colo. Sept. 30, 2025). Semaho owned two commercial buildings insured under a policy issued by AMCO. The buildings were damaged in a windstorm and Semaho’s contractor stored the building materials for the repairs on one building’s roof. A second windstorm then seriously damaged the building materials stored on the roof. Semaho submitted a claim for the lost building materials. Coverage was undisputed but the parties disagreed over which deductible should apply to Semaho’s claim. The key policy provision stated that the deductible should be calculated separately for the “building” and for certain categories of “personal property,” based on “the value(s) of the property that has sustained loss or damage.” Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

---

Oregon Supreme Court Provides Much-Needed Clarity on the State’s Law Regarding Whether Damage from Construction Defect Constitutes An “Occurrence”

September 08, 2025 — Ali H. Jamwal - Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
The Supreme Court of Oregon recently ruled that a general contractor’s tort liability for its defective work may constitute a covered “occurrence” within the meaning of the ISO commercial general liability (“CGL”) policy, providing much needed clarity on the issue under Oregon law.[1] However, property damage arising solely from a contractor’s contractual obligations does not constitute an accident, and thus, is not an “occurrence.” [2] Plaintiffs, Weston and Carrie Twigg, hired Rainer Pacific Development LLC (“Rainer”), a general contractor, to build their home. Admiral Insurance Company (“Admiral”) insured Rainer under a CGL policy. After substantial completion, the Twiggs notified Ranier of various construction defects, which caused property damage. Ultimately, the Twiggs prevailed against Rainer in an arbitration wherein the Twiggs alleged claims of breach of contract, resulting in property damage. Rainer tendered the suit to Admiral, who denied coverage, and the Twiggs, as judgment creditors, sued Admiral, seeking to be paid for the damages awarded in the arbitration. Admiral moved for summary judgment, claiming it had no duty to indemnify because the contractor’s breach of contract was not an accident, there was no “occurrence.” The trial court granted Admiral’s motion for summary judgment. The Court of Appeals affirmed. Plaintiffs appealed to the Oregon Supreme Court. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Ali H. Jamwal, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
Mr. Jamwal may be contacted at AJamwal@sdvlaw.com

---