The “Pay When Paid” Clause in California Construction—Strategies as the Battle Continues
August 03, 2026 —
William L. Porter - Porter Law GroupIt is well known in California Construction circles that the “Pay If Paid” clause is illegal in this state. There is a great distinction, though, between this clause and a similar clause, known as a “Pay When Paid” clause. A pay if paid clause allows a contractor to tell a subcontractor that if the contractor is unpaid for the subcontractor’s work, then the contractor has no legal obligation to pay the subcontractor, ever. For a great variety of reasons, the California Supreme Court, in the case of Wm. R. Clarke Corp v. Safeco Ins. Co. of America (1997) 15 Cal.4th 882, declared this type of clause illegal in California Construction.
Although the pay if paid clause is illegal in California, the pay when paid clause is still perfectly legal and is found in many subcontracts that contractors issue to their subcontractors. The pay when paid clause allows a contractor to delay paying its subcontractors until the dispute between the contractor and the property owner over payment has been resolved and the contractor is paid by the property owner. Although seemingly reasonable (since it merely delays payment until the contractor is paid by the owner, thereby providing a funding source to pay subcontractors), significant problems still arise.
Read the full story...Reprinted courtesy of
William L. Porter, Porter Law GroupMr. Porter may be contacted at
bporter@porterlaw.com
Spain’s Sagrada Familia: Contemporary Construction Methods Speed Iconic Basilica to Completion
March 24, 2026 —
Pam McFarland - Engineering News-RecordIn 2014, the entity behind construction of one of the world’s most iconic churches—the wildly imaginative Sagrada Familia basilica in Barcelona, Spain—contacted global consultant Arup with a challenge: Could the firm help the project team update designs developed more than a century earlier, to ensure that a critical project component was built to be structurally sound?
Read the full story...Reprinted courtesy of
Pam McFarland, Engineering News-RecordMs. McFarland may be contacted at
mcfarlandp@enr.com
Indiana District Court Finds Crane Inspection Services Do Not Trigger “Professional Services” Exclusion in Liability Policy
February 17, 2026 —
Jason Taylor - Traub Lieberman Insurance Law BlogIn Crane 1 Holdco, Inc. et al. v. Continental Ins. Co., 23-cv-205 (N.D. Ind. Jan 12, 2026), the District Court for the Northern District of Indiana had occasion to interpret the scope and meaning of the term “professional services” in an excess liability policy exclusion. By way of background, Robert Coppage was crushed by a crane while at work. He was seriously injured and later received a significant settlement in a state court civil action against the company that inspected the crane, Crane1. Crane1 sought coverage for the settlement under a first layer excess policy issued by Continental Insurance Company, which included an exclusion for any “liability arising out of the actual or alleged rendering of, or failure to render, any professional services by the Insured or any other person for whose acts the Insured is legally responsible.” The underlying complaint alleged that Crane1 was negligent in its modification, services, maintenance, inspection, and/or repair of the crane.
Read the full story...Reprinted courtesy of
Jason Taylor, Traub LiebermanMr. Taylor may be contacted at
jtaylor@tlsslaw.com
When Your Scheduler Hallucinates: Managing AI Risk on the Job Site
March 03, 2026 —
Jason Loring - ConsensusDocsArtificial intelligence has moved from the conference room to the construction site. Contractors are using AI-powered tools to predict schedule delays, monitor safety through drone footage, optimize equipment maintenance and flag potential hazards in real time. These tools deliver genuine efficiency gains, but they also introduce risks that most construction contracts do not anticipate and many project teams aren’t yet equipped to manage.
The problem is that AI tools are probabilistic and not determinative, meaning that they can “hallucinate”: generating confident, but completely wrong, information. Your AI scheduling software might therefore predict a delay that never materializes, causing unnecessary resource mobilization. Your drone monitoring might flag a nonexistent safety hazard, stopping work and costing productivity. Or worse, it might miss a real hazard entirely.
Read the full story...Reprinted courtesy of
Jason Loring, Jones Walker LLPMr. Loring may be contacted at
jloring@joneswalker.com
Arizona Court Enters $323 Million Judgment Against ZOM Living Following Unanimous Jury Verdict
May 26, 2026 —
Gray Development GroupPHOENIX, May 19, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- A Maricopa County court has entered a $323 million compensatory damages judgment in favor of Gray Development Group against ZOM Holding Inc., doing business as ZOM Living, following a 12-day trial, a unanimous jury verdict and post-trial proceedings related to a proposed business transaction.
The jury found ZOM liable on claims of breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing stemming from a proposed joint venture tied to a planned pipeline of luxury multifamily and commercial projects in Phoenix and Scottsdale.
The lawsuit centered on a 13-project, $1.4 billion development pipeline originated and planned by Gray Development Group over more than a decade. In 2019, Gray invited Florida-based ZOM to participate in a joint venture involving the completion of five projects, which would have marked ZOM's entry into the Arizona market.
According to court findings presented at trial, the companies entered into a mutual confidentiality and non-circumvention agreement before Gray shared extensive sensitive and proprietary information related to the projects, including planning, market analysis, costs, financial data, local business relationships and operational strategies developed by Gray over decades in Arizona.
Evidence presented during trial showed that over a 10-month period while under contract, ZOM made hundreds of requests for confidential project and market information before circumventing Gray and pursuing the projects independently, ultimately displacing Gray from projects it spent years planning and developing.
ZOM Living, headquartered in Orlando, develops multifamily and senior housing communities across the United States and operates regional offices in Boston, Dallas, Fort Lauderdale, Nashville, Phoenix, and Raleigh. ZOM is owned by Timeless Investments, the Amsterdam-based family office of Dutch businessman Hans van Veggel, which acquired the company in 1997.
About Gray Development Group
Gray Development Group was founded by architect Bruce Gray in 1991. The Phoenix-based company was the top-ranked multifamily developer in Arizona for more than a decade. The company designed and developed more than 15,000 apartment and condominium units throughout metropolitan Phoenix. Two Gray-designed developments — a Tempe midrise and a San Diego high-rise — received National Apartment Community of the Year awards.
Ayushi Neogi Published in ADC Defense Comment on Arbitration in Evolving Plaintiff-Friendly Landscape
May 12, 2026 —
Gordon Rees Scully MansukhaniGordon Rees Scully Mansukhani Senior Counsel Ayushi Neogi has authored an article in the Association of Defense Counsel of Northern California and Nevada’s Defense Comment magazine examining the shifting landscape of arbitration following the Ending Forced Arbitration Act.
Titled “Compelling Arbitration in a Post-Ending Forced Arbitration Act, Plaintiff-Friendly Landscape,” the article analyzes how recent legislative changes are reshaping arbitration strategy, particularly as employees gain greater ability to bypass arbitration in certain claims. Neogi provides practical insight into how courts are responding and what this means for defense counsel navigating increasingly complex and plaintiff-friendly environments.
Read the full story...Reprinted courtesy of
Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani
On Checks and Balances
March 03, 2026 —
Garret Murai - California Construction Law BlogIt’s called “checks and balances” for a reason. And, generally, it works well so long as there are clear boundaries between the “co-equal” branches of government.
In
Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. Department of Industrial Relations, 108 Cal.App.5th 243 (2025), the 3rd District Court of Appeals upheld a set of regulations issued by the California Apprenticeship Council that contradicted an earlier 2015 ruling of the Court of Appeals.
The Associated General Contractors of California Case
At issue in the case was California’s Prevailing Wage Law which requires public works contractors to hire a certain ratio of apprentices. The purpose of the apprenticeship requirements is to maintain the pipeline of skilled tradespeople on taxpayer-funded projects.
Read the full story...Reprinted courtesy of
Garret Murai, Nomos LLPMr. Murai may be contacted at
gmurai@nomosllp.com
Fort Lauderdale Associate Secures Summary Judgment in Rare Premises Liability Win
February 23, 2026 —
Lewis Brisbois NewsroomFort Lauderdale associate Kyle Hollander recently secured a summary judgment victory for his client, Winn-Dixie, in a contested premises liability case.
This was a hotly disputed liability case of water on the floor near an ice cooler with surveillance footage of a customer constantly bringing bags of ice to and from the cooler to the register. The plaintiff unknowingly stepped into the area of dripped melted ice and fell. Kyle successfully argued based on the plaintiff’s own deposition testimony and the surveillance footage that Winn-Dixie didn’t have the requisite actual notice. Additionally, Kyle argued that the brief duration the condition remained on the floor was legally insufficient to establish constructive notice under Florida law. The Court agreed, finding that the evidence would not survive a directed verdict and granting summary judgment in favor of the defense.
Read the full story...Reprinted courtesy of
Lewis BrisboisRisky Business: Con
ASCE Statement On House Passage Of The Precip Act
Colorado General Assembly Sets Forth Prerequisites for an Insurance Company to Use Failure to Cooperate as a Defense to a Claim for First Party Insurance Benefits
Attorneys Fees Under California’s Prompt Payment Statutes. Contractor’s “Win” Fails the Sniff Test
Sixth Circuit Finds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Under Kentucky Law
Vincent Alexander Named to Florida Trend’s Legal Elite
Governmental Action Exclusion Bars Claim for Damage to Insured's Building
Collapse of Breezeway Attached to Building Covered
Nashville Stadium Bond Deal Tests Future of Spectator Sports
Fed. Judge Blocks Release of Records on FIU Bridge Collapse, Citing NTSB Investigation
The Importance of the Subcontractor Exception to the “Your Work” Exclusion
Insurance Attorney Gary Barrera Joins Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group
Substitute Materials — What Are Your Duties? What Are Your Risks? (Law Note)
Gilbert’s Plan for Downtown Detroit Has No Room for Jail
What Startup Funding Reveals About the Future of Construction Technology
U.K. Construction Unexpectedly Strengthens for a Second Month
Water Damage Sub-Limit Includes Tear-Out Costs
Will O'Neill Joins Newmeyer Dillion as Partner
The Anatomy of a Construction Dispute Stage 3- The Last Straw
New Jersey Condominium Owners Sue FEMA
Navigating Turbulent Waters Ashore: Insurance Lessons from a Navy Project Dispute
My Current Love-Hate Relationship with AI
Adjuster's Report No Substitute for Proof of Loss Under Flood Policy
Did You Get the Message? (And does it count?) The Legal Consequences of Text Messages, Group Chats, and Informal Digital Communication on Construction Projects
Waiver Of Arbitration by Not Submitting Claim to Initial Decision Maker…Really!
Cincinnati Team Secures Summary Judgment for Paving Company in Trip-and-Fall Case
Fifth Circuit Certifies Eight-Corners Duty to Defend Issue to Texas Supreme Court
Super Lawyers Names Five White and Williams LLP Attorneys to its Metro New York Lists
Fort Lauderdale Partner Secures Defense Verdict for Engineering Firm in High-Stakes Negligence Case
Ninth Circuit Court Weighs In On Insurance Coverage For COVID-19 Business Interruption Losses
Gibbs Giden is Pleased to Announce Four New Partners and Two New Associates
Statute of Limitations and Bad Faith Claims: Factors to Consider
Court Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Construction Defect Suit
Town Sues over Defective Work on Sewer Lines
Finding an "Occurrence," Appellate Court Rules Insurer Must Defend
New York State Trial Court: Non-Cumulation Provision in Excess Policies Mandates “All Sums” Allocation
Mortgage Interest Rates Increase on Newly Built Homes
Duty to Defend Triggered by Damage to Other Non-Defective Property
New Executive Order on AI Innovation and Security: Key Takeaways for the Construction Industry
Federal Judge Dismisses Insurance Coverage Lawsuit In Construction Defect Case
Sick Leave, Paid Time Off, and the Families First Coronavirus Response Act
No Duty to Indemnify Where No Duty to Defend
GE to Repay $87 Million for Scaled-Back Headquarters Plan
Eleven WSHB Lawyers Honored on List of 2016 Rising Stars
California Supreme Court Endorses City Authority to Adopt Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
Coyness is Nice. Just Not When Seeking a Default Judgment
Claim for Punitive Damages Based on Insurers' Alleged Bad Faith Business Practices Fails
Never, Ever, Ever Assume! (Or, How a Stuck Shoe is Like a Construction Project Assumption)
Duty to Defend Bodily Injury Evolving Over Many Policy Periods Prorated in Louisiana
Charges in Kansas Water Park Death
EPA Grants Arizona Lead Over Underground Injection Control Program
