Eola Texas Construction Expert Witness Directory

Anatomy of an Insurance Dispute

November 04, 2025 — Will S. Bennett - Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
In early 2025, we participated in a panel discussion about the similarities and differences in the process of resolving a disputed insurance claim. We were both so taken by the striking differences in the process and had such a good time learning about each other’s process that we decided to prepare this joint article to share with a wider audience. Comparatively examining the anatomy of an insurance dispute in the US and the UK is an exercise in contrasts. In many ways, the two are strikingly opposite. Here, we examine, from start to finish, how the process differs in the two jurisdictions and how those differences may contribute to different outcomes, and discuss what lessons perhaps can be gleaned from each other’s experience. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Will S. Bennett, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
Mr. Bennett may be contacted at WBennett@sdvlaw.com

Kahana Feld Partner Pascal Arteaga Achieves Prestigious TBLS Construction Law Board Certification

January 21, 2026 — Kahana Feld
Kahana Feld is pleased to announce that partner Pascal Arteaga has successfully passed the Texas Board of Legal Specialization (TBLS) Construction Law Board Certification Exam—one of the most rigorous specialty certifications in the state. The exam tests deep knowledge of construction-related statutes, contracts, claims, and project delivery systems and is only available to attorneys who first meet demanding experience, continuing legal education, and peer-reference requirements. This achievement reflects Pascal’s extensive experience across critical areas of construction law and his dedication to providing top-level service to his clients. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Kahana Feld

Ninth Circuit Issues Injunction Halting SB 261 Climate Disclosure Laws

December 22, 2025 — Michael S. McDonough & Karen Eskander - Gravel2Gavel Construction & Real Estate Law Blog
On November 18, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued an injunction temporarily halting the implementation of California’s SB 261, the Climate-Related Financial Risk Act, just weeks before the law’s first mandated disclosures on January 1, 2026. The court declined to stay California’s companion climate emissions disclosure bill, the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act (SB 253), due to that bill’s less immediately pressing compliance deadline of August 2026. Background on California Climate Disclosure Laws As we have discussed in previous posts, California enacted two comprehensive climate disclosure laws in 2023. The Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act (SB 253) and the Climate-Related Financial Risk Act (SB 261) impose greenhouse gas emissions and climate-related financial risk reporting requirements that apply to thousands of public and private companies formed under U.S. law and “doing business in California.” The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has released a preliminary list of companies it believes may be subject to the state’s new climate disclosure regime. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. McDonough, Pillsbury and Karen Eskander, Pillsbury Mr. McDonough may be contacted at michael.mcdonough@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Eskander may be contacted at karen.eskander@pillsburylaw.com Read the full story...

Will the YIMBY ‘Holy Grail’ Deliver an LA Building Boom?

December 08, 2025 — Patrick Sisson - Bloomberg
When California Governor Gavin Newsom signed State Bill 79 into law on Oct. 10, supporters of the pro-housing “Yes In My Backyard” movement celebrated a legislative victory that had been called a YIMBY “holy grail.” By legalizing multistory apartments near transit stops in the state’s most urbanized counties — and crucially, in areas formerly zoned for single-family homes — SB 79 was hailed as a huge step toward closing California’s longstanding affordable housing gap. Along with recent reform of the state’s infamous project-delaying environmental review law, CEQA, SB 79 boosters like the advocacy group California YIMBY say that the legislation can unlock the promised goal of “housing abundance” when it comes into effect on July 1, 2026. Now comes the hard part — especially in places like Los Angeles. There, SB 79 faces fierce opposition from community groups who see it as a destroyer of neighborhoods, and from lawmakers like Mayor Karen Bass and a majority of the city council who believe it usurps local control. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Sisson, Bloomberg

EPA Grants Arizona Lead Over Underground Injection Control Program

October 27, 2025 — Patrick J. Paul & John Habib - Snell & Wilmer
On September 10, 2025, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced a final rule granting Arizona primacy to administer all classes of underground injection wells under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). This decision transfers authority for permitting and oversight of the Underground Injection Control (UIC) program from EPA to the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ). UIC Program The UIC program safeguards underground drinking water sources by regulating six classes of wells, from hazardous waste disposal (Class I) to carbon capture and storage (Class VI). States may obtain primacy if they demonstrate their program meets federal requirements. EPA’s approval followed a detailed technical and legal review of Arizona’s application and determined that ADEQ has the resources and statutory authority to implement the program consistent with SDWA. Reprinted courtesy of Patrick J. Paul, Snell & Wilmer and John Habib, Snell & Wilmer Mr. Paul may be contacted at ppaul@swlaw.com Mr. Habib may be contacted at jhabib@swlaw.com Read the full story...

California’s Fair Payment Act: What Every Owner, Developer, and Contractor Should Know About SB 440

November 18, 2025 — Matthew DeVries - Best Practices Construction Law
While most states have enacted various forms of prompt payment laws for construction projects, California Senate Bill 440, known as the Private Works Change Order Fair Payment Act, marks a pivotal change in how payment obligations related to change orders are handled on private construction projects. Signed into law on October 10, 2025 by Governor Newsom, its implementation will affect owners, developers, contractors, and subcontractors alike. Importantly, it sets clear standards for processing change-order claims, imposing decisive deadlines and remedies. The Big Picture SB 440, effective for private contracts beginning on January 1, 2026, establishes a formal claim resolution process for work stemming from change orders on private projects. Key provisions include:

A contractor or subcontractor may submit a claim (for a time extension or additional compensation) and the owner must provide a written statement within 30 days identifying disputed and undisputed portions.

Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Matthew DeVries, Buchalter
Mr. DeVries may be contacted at mdevries@buchalter.com

UPDATED: Dominion Sues Feds Over Offshore Wind Project Halt, With Action Possible on Others Shut

February 02, 2026 — Debra K. Rubin - Engineering News-Record
UPDATED: Dominion Energy filed a federal lawsuit Dec. 23 in Norfolk, Va. against the U.S. Interior Dept. immediate construction pause order for its 2.6-GW Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind energy project (CVOW) off Virginia Beach, Va., which it developing to begin operation next year. The project is one of five large East Coast offshore wind projects under construction that the federal agency paused, claiming new "national security" risks. Dominion and OSW Project LLC, the entity that includes project co-owner Stonepeak Partners, a private investor, said they seek a temporary restraining order. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Debra K. Rubin, Engineering News-Record
Ms. Rubin may be contacted at rubind@enr.com

The Seventh Circuit Rejects Navigators Insurance Company’s Attempt to Escape Additional Insured Coverage For a Gas Explosion

March 24, 2026 — Kyle A. Rudolph & Anna M. Perry - Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
In a recent Seventh Circuit decision, Atlanta Gas Light Company v. Navigators Insurance Company, the court addressed a theme that policyholders are often confronted with by insurers[1] – insurers disputing additional insured coverage where the named insured is not named in the underlying action. The court aptly rejected this position since it was undisputed that the bodily injuries alleged in the underlying lawsuits were due to a gas explosion that was “caused, in whole or in part, by” the named insured’s acts or omissions. I. Background The additional insureds, Atlanta Gas Light Company and Southern Company Gas (collectively, “AGL”), retained the named insured, United States Infrastructure Corporation (“USIC”), to locate and mark gas lines that AGL owned in Georgia. USIC failed to mark a certain gas line, which was later struck by a boring company, leading to an explosion that injured three people. Reprinted courtesy of Kyle A. Rudolph, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Anna M. Perry, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Mr. Rudolph may be contacted at KRudolph@sdvlaw.com Ms. Perry may be contacted at APerry@sdvlaw.com Read the full story...

EOLA TEXAS CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES