ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Prevents Coverage for Collapse

April 27, 2026 — Tred R. Eyerly - Insurance Law Hawaii
The appellate court affirmed the decision of the trial court granting summary judgment to the insurer after agreeing that the policy’s anti-concurrent causation clause barred coverage. Lido Hospitality, Inc. v. AIX Specialty Ins. Co., 2026 Iii. App. Unpub. LEXIS 133 (Ill. Ct. App. Jan. 27, 2026). One of the brick veneer walls of the Lido Motel collapsed during a windstorm. Lido reported the loss it its insurer, AIX. AIX investigated and determined that the brick veneer collapsed due to pervasive wear and tear and corrosion of the underlying infrastructure that secured the veneer- specifically the components that anchored or tied the masonry veneer to the underlying wooden substrate. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

---

Supreme Court Rules Tariffs Unconstitutional: Why the Construction Industry Shouldn’t Expect Calm Just Yet

March 31, 2026 — Christopher Barnett - Construction Executive
The U.S. Supreme Court’s 6–3 decision in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump did what many expected: It held that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not authorize the President to impose tariffs. What few anticipated was the speed of what followed: Within hours of the ruling, the administration announced replacement tariffs under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, imposed a 10% global surcharge effective February 24, and signaled forthcoming Section 301 investigations against most major trading partners. For those in the construction industry hoping the Learning Resources ruling would restore market stability, the message was unambiguous. The constitutional question may be settled, but the market disruption is not. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Barnett, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

---

Bridging the Information Gap of Alternative Delivery Methods on Public Projects

January 21, 2026 — Michael S. Blackwell - The Dispute Resolver
In almost all corners of the country, municipalities, counties, and states alike have historically employed a design-bid-build approach to public projects. While the delivery method lends itself easily to selecting the lowest bidder for both the design and construction phases of projects, it also excludes other, alternative methods that may be better suited for projects that require contractor involvement during the design phase, a phased approach to completion, or partnership between the public entity and private investment. But implementation of new delivery methods has posed a problem in some areas due to a lack of familiarity. This blog post proposes a simple solution. As early as the mid-late 1990s, changes in federal procurement laws allowed for the adoption of design-build, one option for alternative delivery, for public projects. Since that time, states, municipalities, and other public entities have followed suit. Today, you can find the use of design-build, progressive design-build, A + B, CM/GC, CMAR, and P3 just to name a few of the delivery methods that have been adopted in various states. These alternatives help provide options to public entities to find the right fit for their project. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Blackwell, Riess LeMieux, LLC
Mr. Blackwell may be contacted at mblackwell@rllaw.com

---

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

---

Florida Litigation Team Delivers Crushing Summary Judgment Victory for National Home Builder

December 08, 2025 — Wood Smith Henning & Berman
The Wood Smith Henning & Berman Orlando trial team recently delivered a significant victory for a national home builder, obtaining three separate summary judgment rulings that resulted in a complete dismissal of all claims in a premises liability action in which the plaintiff demanded a seven-figure settlement. Partner Ian Gillan and Senior Associate Brian Hartley filed targeted motions for summary judgment addressing (1) trespassing; (2) Florida Building Code issues, and (3) OSHA applicability. The court granted all three motions. The case involved allegations that the plaintiff sustained injuries on a residential construction site. Plaintiff asserted that alleged violations of the Florida Building Code and OSHA regulations established a standard of care that was breached. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Wood Smith Henning & Berman

---

Elliott Backed Venture Sues Lloyds Over Avant Cladding, Times Reports

February 17, 2026 — Eamon Farhat - Bloomberg
Elliott Investment Management and British housing tycoon Jeff Fairburn, joint-venture partners in UK homebuilder Avant Homes Group, are suing Lloyds Banking Group Plc over who should pay to fix properties that fail to meet post-Grenfell fire-safety standards, the Times reported. Avant, which faces remediation costs of at least £107 million ($146 million) for potentially dangerous cladding, argues that Lloyds should shoulder part of the bill because most of the developments were built before 2014, when the homebuilder was under the bank’s ownership, the Times reported. Cladding has become a contentious issue in the UK following the Grenfell Tower fire in June 2017, in which dozens died after flames spread rapidly through flammable exterior cladding on the West London high-rise, laying bare deep failures in Britain’s building safety regulations. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Eamon Farhat, Bloomberg

---

New Legislation Requires Changes to your California Home Improvement Contract for 2026

November 18, 2025 — William L. Porter - Porter Law Group
California Business and Professions Code 7159, first enacted in 2004, was intended as a consumer protection measure to protect homeowners hiring contractors for home improvement work. The legislation sought to meet this laudable goal by dictating the terms to be used in home improvement contracts. covering everything from mandatory contractual language, lists of documents to be included, legal warnings to be provided, dispute resolution procedures, dictating where to initial, where to sign and even font size. The legislation unfortunately made it impossible to provide a homeowner with anything more than a complex multi-page legal document which many homeowners viewed with suspicion. The unintended consequence is that those contractors who violate the law and use a short but simple one or two-page, but illegal contract end up obtaining work. Those who follow the law and use the multi-page legally mandated contract end up losing customers because the contract is long, complex and frightening. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, Porter Law Group
Mr. Porter may be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com

---

Allegations in Insured’s Complaint Sufficient to Survive Motion to Dismiss

November 09, 2025 — Tred R. Eyerly - Insurance Law Hawaii
The insured’s complaint sufficiently pled breach of contract and bad faith to survive the insurer’s motion to dismiss. Macias v. Am. Family Ins. Co., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148628 (D. Colo. Aug. 1, 2025). A hailstorm damaged the insureds’ property, including the roof. The insureds filed a claim (Claim One) with American Family. An adjuster assigned by American Family found storm-related damage to the gutters, window screens and lattice work, but only non-storm-related damage to other items, such as the roof. American Family determined the losses amounted to $1,104.97, which was below the deductible. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

---