LOMAX ILLINOIS CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

Circuit Court Supports Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product Protections in Connection with Internal Investigations

November 21, 2025 — Jason Spitalnick, Taryn J. Gallup & Kourtney George - Snell & Wilmer
On October 3, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reaffirmed that the attorney-client privilege and work-product protections cover documents and communications concerning corporate internal investigations - even when companies later use those documents or related findings to make business decisions.1 In doing so, the court vacated a district court order that would have required FirstEnergy Corporation to produce, in civil litigation, privileged and work-product-protected documents related to two internal investigations. FirstEnergy, a public utility company headquartered in Ohio, became embroiled in a high-profile public-corruption scheme involving substantial alleged payments to state officials in exchange for favorable legislative efforts. In response, FirstEnergy and an independent committee of its board retained separate outside counsel to conduct internal investigations. FirstEnergy then faced civil litigation related to the same underlying facts. Reprinted courtesy of Jason Spitalnick, Snell & Wilmer, Taryn J. Gallup, Snell & Wilmer and Kourtney George, Snell & Wilmer Mr. Spitalnick may be contacted at jspitalnick@swlaw.com Ms. Gallup may be contacted at tgallup@swlaw.com Ms. George may be contacted at kegeorge@swlaw.com Read the full story...

---

Acuity v. Kinsale Insurance Company: Co-Carrier Obligations and Subrogation under Colorado Law

November 21, 2025 — Olivia Barden - Colorado Construction Litigation Blog
In Acuity v. Kinsale Insurance Company, 750 F. Supp. 3d 1229 (D. Colo. 2024), the United States District Court for the District of Colorado addressed the duties and rights of multiple insurers that issued commercial general liability (“CGL”) policies to the same insured. The decision clarifies how subrogation and contribution apply when one carrier funds a settlement and another refuses to participate. Background Phipps Construction Company served as the general contractor for the construction of a retirement community in Lakewood, Colorado. Phipps subcontracted the stucco work to Monarch Stucco, Inc. When the project owner, BMSH I Lakewood CO LLC, alleged construction defects, it brought an arbitration action against Phipps. Phipps in turn filed a third-party claim against Monarch, alleging defective and cracking stucco on fifteen buildings. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC

---

Protect Your Projects By Identifying and Controlling Hidden Contract Risks

March 10, 2026 — Larry Borda & Daniel Lund III - JD Supra
In a recent webinar entitled “Spreading the Risk and Avoiding Killer Contract Clauses,” Phelps lawyers Daniel Lund and Larry Borda examined contractual provisions that most often expose construction professionals to unexpected financial and legal risk. While construction contracts may appear routine, each contract serves as the primary mechanism for managing, allocating, and mitigating risk among parties involved in complex projects—often valued in the hundreds of millions or billions of dollars. When parties fail to fully understand the terms they sign, costly and avoidable consequences frequently follow. Contracts as Risk-Transfer Instruments Construction contracts are the primary method for transferring risk. While contracts authorize work and define scope, they also allocate responsibility for the risks inherent in construction projects. Some may imagine a world where a one-page agreement and a set of plans would suffice. In reality, modern construction requires detailed agreements—particularly provisions designed to anticipate problems, distribute burdens and reduce disputes. Reprinted courtesy of Larry Borda, Phelps and Daniel Lund III, Phelps Mr. Borda may be contacted at larry.borda@phelps.com Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com Read the full story...

---

Mind The Gap!

November 04, 2025 — Daniel Lund III - JD Supra
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York addressed the scope of insurance coverage for workplace injuries on a Brooklyn, New York, construction project, holding that the project owner’s insurer had no duty to defend or indemnify the owner in a personal injury lawsuit stemming from a construction accident. The property owner hired a general contractor for a condominium project. In March 2020, an employee of one of the GC’s subcontractors was injured when a scaffold collapsed. The employee sued both the property owner at the general contractor in state court. The owner sought coverage and a defense from its commercial general liability insurer, but the insurer denied coverage, citing three exclusions: Contracted Persons, Independent Contractors, and Condominium. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Lund, Phelps
Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com

---

Application of Ordinance and Law Coverage in Property Insurance Policy and Twenty-Five Percent Rule

December 08, 2025 — David Adelstein - Florida Construction Legal Updates
A recent case involved a homeowner’s all-risk property insurance policy with ordinance and law coverage. This ordinance and law coverage required the carrier “to cover costs that the [insureds] incur as a result of any ordinance that requires them to replace ‘the portion of the undamaged part of a covered building or other structure necessary to complete the remodeling, repair or replacement of that part of the covered building or other structure damaged by a Peril Insured Against.” Weston v. Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Co., 50 Fla.L.Weekly D2307a (Fla. 2d DCA 2025). The property insurance policy required the insurer to pay the actual cash value of the loss, minus any deductible, and “any remaining amounts necessary to perform such repairs as work is performed and expenses are incurred.” Id. Here, the insureds sustained roof damage from a storm. The insureds had an expert that opined, with a reasonable degree of certainty, that the entire roof needed to be replaced because “[t]here was damage to more than twenty-five percent of the roof, and the Florida Building Code provided that if more than twenty-five percent of the roof was damaged, then the entire roof should be replaced.” Weston, supra. The insureds also had an expert that testified to an estimate- the replacement cost of the damage as well as the actual cash value of that damage. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

---

2026 Construction Law Update

January 26, 2026 — Garret Murai - California Construction Law Blog
Happy New Year! Hope the holidays were enjoyable for you. During the first session of the California Legislature’s 2025-2026 legislative session, 2,350 bills were introduced, of which 917 bills made it to the Governor’s desk, and of which 794 bills were signed into law. For the design and construction industry the most important bills are a new claims resolution procedure for private works projects, a 5% retention cap on certain private works projects, and a number of changes to home improvement contract requirements. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Garret D. Murai, Nomos LLP
Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

---

Always Keep Your Time Limits in Mind—to Know When You Can Sue, and When You Can No Longer Be Sued (Law Note)

December 15, 2025 — Melissa Dewey Brumback - Construction Law in North Carolina
As the calendar year is getting a little long in the tooth, the subject of time becomes top of mind. Time, in litigation, can make or break your ability to sue (or be sued). A recent blog post by blogger John Caravella addressing statutes of limitations in New York (6 years) and Florida (5 years) brought to mind the issues that sometimes surprise folks working in North Carolina. In North Carolina, the statute of limitations is (generally) set at 3 years for breach of contract matter, including breaches of construction contracts. However, there are always exceptions. The statute of repose in North Carolina for damages to real property is 6 years. What that means is that if there is a ‘latent defect’ that is not obvious right away, you may still have a claim beyond three years (but not beyond the 6 year repose limit). Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett
Ms. Brumback may be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com

---

Navigating Turbulent Waters Ashore: Insurance Lessons from a Navy Project Dispute

February 02, 2026 — Cary D. Steklof & Torrye Zullo - Hunton Insurance Recovery Blog
As we ring in the New Year, one thing remains the same: understanding the definitions and conditions in your insurance policy is critical. In a recent decision, a Florida federal court in Ohio Security Insurance Co. v. E Kelly Enterprises Inc. et al., No. 3:22-cv-24754, held that an insurer had no duty to defend or indemnify a general contractor and no duty to indemnify a subcontractor for damages from defective work on a naval base, based on the policy’s definition of “suit,” “property damage,” and allocation requirements. The decision highlights the importance of numerous issues in the context of commercial general liability policies, including the nuances of policy definitions, obtaining insurer consent when necessary, and allocation between covered and uncovered claims. Background In October 2014, a general contractor (“GC”) was awarded a contract by the Navy to renovate buildings at the Naval Air Station in Pensacola. The GC subcontracted work to various subcontractors, including metal framing and drywall, to a subcontractor named EKE. Reprinted courtesy of Cary D. Steklof, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP and Torrye Zullo, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP Mr. Steklof may be contacted at csteklof@hunton.com Ms. Zullo may be contacted at tzullo@hunton.com Read the full story...

---