Snell & Wilmer Recognized With Top Honor in Ranking Arizona: Top Law Firms for 2026
June 22, 2026 —
Snell & WilmerPHOENIX – Snell & Wilmer is pleased to announce that the firm has been voted as the top law firm in Arizona for the 17th consecutive year in the 2026 edition of AZ Big Media’s
Ranking Arizona: The Best of Arizona Business. The firm was again recognized in the category of “Top 10 large law firms in Arizona” which looked at firms with 39 attorneys or more.
“We are honored to receive this award recognizing our team’s ongoing commitment to excellence in service of our clients, our community, and each other,” said Firm Chair Barbara J. Dawson. “We are proud to play a meaningful role in supporting the strength and growth of Arizona’s vibrant business environment amid a rapidly changing global economy.”
Read the full story...Reprinted courtesy of
Snell & Wilmer
Integration Can Inoculate in Utah
July 20, 2026 —
Mark O. Morris - Snell & WilmerThe Utah Court of Appeals recently reaffirmed, in the construction context, Utah’s strict approach to enforcing integration clauses to preclude parol evidence and other legal theories that would vary the written terms of a contract. In Reid v. All Surface LC, 2025 UT App 134, decided last September, the court affirmed in all respects the trial court’s grant of summary judgment based on the strength of an integration clause against a homeowner who sued a contractor for breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, civil conspiracy, negligence, and breach of the implied warranty of habitability. More recently, however, the same court rejected those same arguments in Tidwell v. Jensen, 2026 UT App 13 as to tort claims arising from a used car sale.
The facts in Reid were sympathetic to the plaintiff. After being told she had a mold issue near a defective basement shower, the plaintiff solicited bids. A remediation contractor advised that while it could address the mold, the shower replacement should be handled by someone else. The plaintiff contacted All Surface LC, a shower replacement contractor. During an interview, the sales representative stated that All Surface could “do full mold remediation, tear everything out, and reframe the shower.” The plaintiff ultimately retained All Surface, expecting it would both resolve the mold issues and replace the shower.
Read the full story...Reprinted courtesy of
Mark O. Morris, Snell & WilmerMr. Morris may be contacted at
mmorris@swlaw.com
White and Williams LLP Secures Trio of Cyber Coverage Wins
May 12, 2026 —
Gabriel Darwick & Sean Elman - White and Williams LLPThree weeks, three jurisdictions, three cyber wins.
White and Williams picked up the first victory on March 9, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, where the court granted summary judgment to their client enforcing a Cyber Crime Loss sublimit. See Perry & Perry Builders, Inc. v. Cowbell Cyber and Obsidian Specialty Ins. Co., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49409 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 9, 2026). In Perry, the insured was deceived into transferring money intended for a vendor to an unintended third party. The insurer acknowledged that the loss was covered and paid the insured the policy’s Cyber Crime Loss sublimit. Discontent with a single sublimit, the insured argued that because it wired the money to the fraudster in separate transfers, it was entitled to a second Cyber Crime Loss sublimit.
Reprinted courtesy of
Gabriel Darwick, White and Williams LLP and
Sean Elman, White and Williams LLP
Mr. Darwick may be contacted at darwickg@whiteandwilliams.com
Mr. Elman may be contacted at elmans@whiteandwilliams.com
Read the full story...
What Massachusetts Contractors and Developers Can Learn from Cannistraro v. Columbia Construction
July 13, 2026 —
Anthony LaPlaca & Luke Marston - The Construction SeytIntroduction
On June 26, 2026 the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court issued its decision in J.C. Cannistraro, LLC v. Columbia Construction Co.—a holding that sits at the intersection of Prompt Pay Act compliance and the Massachusetts Arbitration Act.
[1]
Most already know that the Massachusetts Prompt Pay Act (PPA) imposes strict timing and certification requirements for rejecting payment applications and proposed change orders on projects valued at $3 million or more. Most notably, the PPA requires the paying party to give the payee written notice of its approval or rejection of progress applications and proposed changes within 15 days of receipt, which notice must include a “factual and contractual basis for the rejection” and must be “certified as made in good faith.”
[2] In the absence of a timely certified notice, payment is “deemed to be approved” unless the payor properly rejects payment before it comes due.
[3]
Reprinted courtesy of
Anthony LaPlaca, Seyfarth Shaw LLP and
Luke Marston, Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Mr. LaPlaca may be contacted at alaplaca@seyfarth.com
Mr. Marston may be contacted at lmarston@seyfarth.com
Read the full story...
Segal McCambridge Recognized in 2026 Chambers USA Rankings
June 15, 2026 —
Segal McCambridgeLos Angeles, CA, June 8, 2026 -
Segal McCambridge is pleased to announce that the firm has been recognized as a leader by Chambers USA in California. The firm is listed in the Chambers-ranked department, receiving a
Band 5 ranking for construction in California. The ranking further reinforces the firm's commitment to supporting California's construction market, from owners to developers and contractors, in high-stakes disputes statewide.
"Chambers' research-driven process and independence make this acknowledgment especially meaningful. We're proud of this ranking and grateful to our clients and colleagues whose consistent trust and collaboration make our work possible," said Jason P. Eckerly, Managing Shareholder of Segal McCambridge.
Chambers and Partners is widely regarded as one of the legal industry's most respected and independent ranking organizations. Operating across 200 jurisdictions and relied on in more than 70 countries, Chambers has, since 1990, conducted rigorous research to identify leading lawyers and law firms through a methodology that combines analysis of firm capability, achievement, and market presence through interviews and assessment of recent matters across more than 1,400 U.S. ranking tables, covering all 50 states, Washington, DC, and nationwide.
About Segal McCambridge
Segal McCambridge has built a reputation as a national law firm of accomplished trial attorneys for almost four decades. Founded in 1986, the firm has grown from a four-lawyer shop in Chicago to a firm with more than 20 offices nationwide. The firm routinely counsels and defends clients, including Fortune 500 companies, corporations, and individuals, across the United States in complex litigation matters, including, but not limited to: asbestos, class action, construction, employment, environmental, food and beverage, insurance coverage and bad faith, life sciences, product liability, professional liability, technology and cyber risk, transportation, and warranty. For more information, visit: www.segalmccambridge.com.
That’s a Wrap! Pennsylvania Court Holds Arbitration Clause in Online Agreement Unenforceable
May 14, 2026 —
Gus Sara - The Subrogation StrategistIn Duffy v. Tatum, 2026 Pa. Super. LEXIS 112, 2026 PA Super 41, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania (Superior Court) considered whether an arbitration provision contained in the online Terms of Service on the defendant’s website were enforceable. The plaintiff, Daniel Duffy (Duffy), visited the website of defendant, Dolly, Inc. (Dolly), to purchase moving services. Duffy selected the number of movers, items to be moved and the type of vehicle needed. To complete the booking, the website required Duffy to checkmark a box labeled “By checking this box I accept the Dolly Terms of Service.” Duffy did not have to open the link or scroll to the bottom of the agreement before being able to click on the checkmark box. The Terms of Service included an arbitration provision requiring that any dispute related to the moving services to be resolved by arbitration in accordance with the American Arbitration Association. The Terms of Service did not include any statement that the user was waiving the right to a jury trial. The Superior Court found the internet Terms of Service unenforceable.
During the moving process, an accident occurred and injured Duffy. In May 2024, Duffy and his wife sued Dolly and other related entities alleging negligence and loss of consortium. Dolly filed preliminary objections alleging that the parties agreed to alternative dispute resolution. The lower court overruled the preliminary objections, finding that Dolly’s website did not provide reasonably obvious notice of its Terms of Service to Duffy and, as such, Duffy never agreed to waive his constructional right to a jury trial. Dolly filed an appeal to the Superior Court.
Read the full story...Reprinted courtesy of
Gus Sara, White and Williams LLPMr. Sara may be contacted at
sarag@whiteandwilliams.com
Applying Jury Verdict Method in Quantifying Damages Due to Defective Specifications
March 31, 2026 —
David Adelstein - Florida Construction Legal UpdatesAn older case deals with three important considerations: (1) defective specifications; (2) whether the defective specifications were misleading or misrepresentative; and (3) applying the jury verdict method in quantifying damages.
In Metric Construction Co., Inc. v. U.S., 80 Fed. Cl. 178 (Fed. Cl. 2008), a contractor was contracted by the federal government to construct a warehouse. There were defects in the structural steel design specifications underlying the standing seam metal roof installed by the contractor and, as a result, the roof system leaked causing damage. The contractor incurred significant costs in repairing the damage, and pursued recovery of these costs against the government. The contractor claimed the structural steel design serving as the framework for the metal roof was defective and misleading and caused the leaks.
Read the full story...Reprinted courtesy of
David Adelstein, Kirwin NorrisMr. Adelstein may be contacted at
dma@kirwinnorris.com
White and Williams LLP Ranked in the Chambers USA 2026 Guide
June 15, 2026 —
White and Williams LLPWhite and Williams LLP is proud to celebrate the Chambers USA 2026 Guide which has ranked several of the Firm's attorneys and practice groups, underscoring the Firm's overall commitment to providing client service excellence.
The Chambers USA 2026 Guide recognized attorneys Tim Davis, Managing Partner, and Nancy Frantz, Chair of the Real Estate
Not Remotely Law as Usual: Don’t Settle for Delays – Settle at Remote MediationColorado Mayors Should Not Sacrifice Homeowners to Lure Condo Developers“Pay No Attention to the Man Behind the Curtain!”Forethought Is Key to Overcoming Construction CalamitiesMassachusetts Federal Court Rejects Adria Towers, Finds Construction Defects Not an “Occurrence”<
When Coronavirus Cases Spike at Construction Jobsites9 Basic Strategies for Pursuing Coverage for Construction Accident ClaimsContractor’s Charge Of Improvements To Real Property Not Required For Laborers To Have Lien RightsFlooded Courtroom May be Due to Construction DefectTexas Supreme Court Declines to Waive Sovereign Immunity in Premises Defect CaseIRMI Expert Commentary: Managing Insurance Coverage from Multiple InsurersPrejudice to Insurer After Late Notice of Hurricane Damage Raises Issue of FactLegal 500 US Ranks Hunton’s Insurance Coverage Team Among Top Policyholder Practices in 2026 GuideCalifornia Contractor Spills Coffee on Himself by Failing to Stay Mechanics Lien Action While Pursuing ArbitrationEleven Payne & Fears Attorneys Honored by Best LawyersLiability Policy’s Arbitration Endorsement Applies to Third Party Beneficiaries, Including Additional InsuredsThe Treasures Inside Notre Dame CathedralCalifornia Bullet Train Clears Federal Environmental ApprovalSchool District Gets Expensive Lesson on Prompt Payment Law. But Did the Court Get it Right?Feds to Repair Damage From Halted Border Wall Work in Texas, CaliforniaFlorida Governor Signs COVID-19 Liability ShieldPrecedent-Setting ‘Green’ Apartments in Kansas CityKey California Employment Law Cases: October 2018Connecticut Answers Critical Questions Regarding Scope of Collapse Coverage in Homeowners Policies in Insurers’ FavorFlorida’s Third District Court of Appeal Suggests Negligent Repairs to Real Property Are Not Subject to the Statute of ReposeBidder Be Thoughtful: The Impacts of Disclaimers in Pre-Bid ReportsThat’s Common Knowledge! Failure to Designate an Expert Witness in a Professional Negligence Case is Not Fatal Where “Common Knowledge” Exception AppliesContractual Impartiality Requires an Appraiser to be Unbiased, Disinterested, and Unswayed by Personal Interest Revamp to Nationwide Permits Impacting Oil and Gas Pipeline, Utility and Telecom Line WorkTexas Granted Primacy Over Class VI Carbon Storage WellsCalifornia Mechanics’ Lien Case Treads Both Old and New GroundBeing deposed—not just for dictators! Depositions in the construction lawsuit (Law & Order: Hard Hat files Part 5)Gut Feeling Does Not Disqualify Expert OpinionCompass, Zillow Take Feud Over Home Listings Into NYC CourtDisputes Over Arbitrator Qualifications: The Northern District of California Offers Some GuidanceShould I Pull the Pin? Contractor and Subcontractor Termination for Cause“Wait! Do You Have All Your Ducks in a Row?” Filing of a Certificate of Merit in Conjunction With a ComplaintA New Hope - You Now May Have Coverage for Punitive Damages in ConnecticutHomebuilders Leading U.S. Consumer Stocks: EcoPulseU.S. Supreme Court Decision May Negate State Law Requirement to File a Certificate of Merit with the Complaint in a Federal Action Against a Design ProfessionalAppeals Court Upholds Skanska, Granite Win in ‘I-4 Ultimate’ JV DisputeBoston Catwalk Collapse Injures Three WorkersWhy Are Developers Still Pouring Billions Into Waterlogged Miami?New York Assembly Reconsiders ‘Bad Faith’ BillWhere Mechanic’s Liens and Contracts CollideCongratulations Bryan Stofferahn, August Hotchkin, and Eileen Gaisford on Their Promotion to Partner!New York: The "Loss Transfer" Opportunity to Recover Otherwise Non-Recoverable First-Party BenefitsSupreme Court Addresses Newly Amended Statute of Repose for Construction ClaimsConstruction Law- Where Pragmatism and Law CollideEO or Uh-Oh: Biden’s Executive Order Requiring Project Labor Agreements on Federal Construction ProjectsBreach of an Oral Contract and Unjust Enrichment and Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair DealingHow Long is Your Construction Warranty?The Hazards of Carrier-Specific Manuscript Language: Ohio Casualty's Off-Premises Property Damage and Contractors' E&O EndorsementsCourt of Appeals Finds Additional Insured Coverage Despite “Care, Custody or Control” ExclusionContractor Given a Wake-Up Call for Using a "Sham" RMO/RME
