Max Minnesota Construction Expert Witness Directory

Construction Expert and Judge Living in the Same Hood Is Not Grounds For Recusal

December 08, 2025 — Matthew DeVries - Best Practices Construction Law
In a recent Tennessee Court of Appeals decision, Nowaczyk v. Daniels Construction (Nov. 4, 2025), a contractor tried to disqualify the trial judge because the judge happened to live in the same neighborhood as a potential expert witness for the homeowners. The court’s response? Proximity isn’t prejudice. The dispute started when homeowners sued Daniels Construction for allegedly botched remodeling work. When the judge disclosed during a hearing that he lived near the plaintiffs’ proposed expert, the defense moved to have him recused from the case. They argued that prior cases involving the same expert had led to recusals. The trial judge, however, made clear there was no personal or professional relationship with the expert and denied the motion. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Matthew J. DeVries, Buchalter
Mr. DeVries may be contacted at mdevries@buchalter.com

California Enacts Change Order Fair Payment Act

March 24, 2026 — Michael J. Baker - Snell & Wilmer
For private works construction contracts entered on or after January 1, 2026, recent legislation establishes a claims and dispute resolution process for change orders. The law is codified at Civil Code § 8850. A synopsis of the pertinent provisions includes the following:

Submitting a Claim. Contractors or subcontractors must submit a detailed, documented claim when requesting additional time or payment.
Owner’s Response Time. The owner must meet and confer within thirty (30) days after receiving the claim. Within ten (10) days of meeting, the owner must provide a written statement identifying which portions of the claim are undisputed and which are disputed. An owner’s failure to respond is treated as disputing the entire claim.

Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Michael J. Baker, Snell & Wilmer
Mr. Baker may be contacted at mjbaker@swlaw.com

Toolbox Talk Series: GenAI Document Review

January 06, 2026 — Brendan J. Witry - The Dispute Resolver
This month's installment of the Toolbox Talk Series explored the use of Generative AI in document review, which as construction lawyers know can be voluminous. Jack Bandlow and Travis Olson from BRG provided an overview of how lawyers can use GenAI to make document review in construction litigation more efficient. Like other uses of GenAI, it is a tool that is not designed to replace lawyers. Rather it helps eliminate or reduce mundane or tedious tasks that are not the highest and best use of a lawyer's time. The AI-powered document review platforms are designed to recognize patterns in documents and transforms words and text into "vectors" to group concepts with similar meanings. For example, whereas a traditional keyword search for "weather delay" will only return hits on that keyword, a search utilizing vectoring will also search for conceptually similar terms, even if the keyword does not match. These tools can use natural language searches to return results that a responsive to the prompt. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Brendan J. Witry, Laurie & Brennan LLP
Mr. Witry may be contacted at bwitry@lauriebrennan.com

Only A Contractor Can Appeal a Contracting Officer’s Final Decision

April 20, 2026 — David Adelstein - Florida Construction Legal Updates
A recent decision from the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals confirms that “only a ‘contractor’ may file an appeal of a contracting officer’s final decision.” Wattiker v. General Services Administration, 2026 WL 846001 (CBCA 2026) (citation omitted). The term “contractor is not an ambiguous term. A ‘contractor’ refers to a party to a federal government contract. Wattiker (citing the Contract Disputes Act). This is why the Contract Disputes Act does not apply to parties that are NOT in contract with the federal government. Id. In Wattiker, an appellant (appealing party) challenged the dismissal of a co-appellant. The co-appellant was dismissed because he was not a contractor, i.e., a party in contract with the federal government. In other words, the co-appellant had no privity of contract with the federal government. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.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

Reckless Disregard is. . . Well. . .Reckless

December 30, 2025 — Christopher G. Hill - Construction Law Musings
Punitive damages are hard to come by in construction law cases. This is because almost all construction contract cases are exactly that: contract cases. Between the economic loss rule and the Virginia Courts’ almost (though not completely) impregnable wall between tort and contract, punitive damages may seem completely out of the picture. Depending on your perspective and position on the construction project food chain, this fact can be either frustrating or comforting. However, like all seemingly immutable laws, this one has an exception according to the Chesapeake County, Virginia Circuit Court. In Sawyer v. C.L. Pincus Jr. & Co. et. al. this Virginia court was faced with the following scenario. The defendants, a church and its contractor, were sued by Sawyer over a construction swale that was built partly on Sawyer’s property. According to the plaintiff, the only permission they gave to their neighbors at the church was to allow the church to build a drainage berm that did not encroach on their property. As stated above, the church and its contractor built a swale that encroached on the Sawyers’ property. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

Call Me Maybe: California’s Fair Claims Settlement Practices Regulations

November 04, 2025 — Garret Murai - California Construction Law Blog
It’s not uncommon in construction claims for there to be Insurance and bond issues, whether it’s tendering a claim to your insurer, or claims against a license, payment, or performance bond. Insurance Code section 790.03 sets forth sixteen (16) unfair claims settlement practices by insurers and sureties including:

Misrepresenting to claimants pertinent facts or insurance policy provisions relating to any coverages at issue.
Failing to acknowledge and act reasonably promptly upon communications with respect to claims arising under insurance policies.
Failing to adopt and implement reasonable standards for the prompt investigation and processing of claims arising under insurance policies.

Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

Snell & Wilmer Receives Multiple National and Regional Top Tier Rankings in 2026 “Best Law Firms® Rankings” by Best Lawyers®

December 08, 2025 — Snell & Wilmer
PHOENIX – Snell & Wilmer is proud to announce it has once again been recognized by Best Law Firms®, earning 34 national and 199 regional rankings across 74 categories by Best Lawyers® in their annual Best Law Firms rankings. The firm received national Tier 1 rankings for its Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law, Commercial Litigation, Communications Law, Construction Law, Corporate Law, Litigation – Construction, Litigation – Labor and Employment, Litigation – Real Estate, Real Estate Law, and Securities Regulation categories. The firm also earned national rankings in 24 other categories, and 15 of its offices earned regional rankings. The 2026 Best Law Firms rankings are based on the highest number of participating firms and the highest number of client ballots on record. The rankings are determined through a rigorous evaluation process that includes the collection of client and lawyer evaluations, peer review from leading attorneys in their field, and review of additional information supporting a firm’s accomplishments. The following is the complete list of Snell & Wilmer practices ranked in the 2026 Best Law Firms: National Rankings Banking and Finance Law Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law Commercial Litigation Communications Law Construction Law Corporate Law Employment Law – Management Energy Law Environmental Law Financial Services Regulation Law Health Care Law Labor Law – Management Litigation – Banking and Finance Litigation – Bankruptcy Litigation – Construction Litigation – Environmental Litigation – Intellectual Property Litigation – Labor and Employment Litigation – Real Estate Litigation – Regulatory Enforcement (SEC, Telecom, Energy) Litigation – Securities Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions – Defendants Mergers and Acquisitions Law Mining Law Native American Law Natural Resources Law Patent Law Real Estate Law Securities / Capital Markets Law Securities Regulation Tax Law Trademark Law Trusts and Estates Venture Capital Law Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Snell & Wilmer

MAX MINNESOTA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES