No Cross-Complaint Needed - Court of Appeal Clarifies Co-Defendants May Oppose Each Other’s Summary Judgment Motions Without a Cross-Complaint
October 27, 2025 —
Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLPOn September 29, 2025, the Second District Court of Appeal issued an opinion in Bean v. City of Thousand Oaks (B338497), holding that a co-defendant with an adverse interest can oppose a motion for summary judgment without having filed a cross-complaint against the moving party.
Plaintiff Bonnie Bean tripped and fell on a raised section of sidewalk in front of a Ventura County residence. She sued both the City of Thousand Oaks and Gina Goode, the owner of an adjacent property, alleging that tree roots from Goode’s yard caused a sidewalk defect.
Read the full story...Reprinted courtesy of
Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP
PSA: Be Sure to Document (Even When Time is Short)
April 14, 2026 —
Christopher G. Hill - Construction Law MusingsWritten
change orders are a big deal. Almost all construction contracts (at least
the well drafted ones) require written contracts. Written change orders are even important enough that Virginia law
requires these provisions in residential construction contracts.
Why are they so important? Because they are a “mini-contract” of sorts. They
set the expectations, price, time, and work to be performed; work that was not included in the original price or scope for the project. Without this in writing, there will be no record of what the parties agreed to do. Does this sound familiar? Sound like its own contract? It should.
Read the full story...Reprinted courtesy of
The Law Office of Christopher G. HillMr. Hill may be contacted at
chrisghill@constructionlawva.com
Celebrating 29 Years – Thank You for Your Continued Trust!
April 20, 2026 —
Dolores Montoya - Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLPFor 29 years, Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP has grown alongside the clients and communities we proudly serve.
What began as a single office in Orange County has evolved into a multi-state firm with 11 locations across five states. Today, we are proud to be supported by a dedicated team of more than 200 attorneys and over 400 employees who work every day to deliver exceptional service and results.
This milestone is not just about where we started; it’s about the people who have helped shape who we are today. Our continued growth reflects the strength of our relationships, the trust of our clients and partners, and the commitment of our team.
Read the full story...Reprinted courtesy of
Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP
Turnover Traps for Community Associations: Investigate First, Release Claims Later
April 14, 2026 —
Nicholas B. Vargo - Ball Janik LLPTurnover of a community association from developer control to owner control is a uniquely vulnerable moment. Developers are increasingly presenting Florida condominium and homeowners’ associations with “standard” settlement or release agreements at turnover, often being framed as routine steps to finalize the transition of control. In reality, these agreements can have sweeping consequences, including the release of construction-defect claims before the association has conducted any meaningful independent evaluation.
The developer has years of project knowledge and access to plans, subcontractors, and internal records. The newly elected board is just beginning to organize, obtain documents, and understand the property’s condition. Many defects, especially those involving roofing, waterproofing, windows, or structural components, are latent and not yet visible. Signing a release at this stage means the association is making a binding decision under conditions of uncertainty, without full information, to release all future potential claims.
Over the last few years, there has been a rise in reports of developers offering a packaged deal: they agree to complete certain repairs, often minor punch-list or cosmetic items, and to “forgive” an alleged financial deficit (often around $50,000) supposedly owed by the association from the developer-control period. In exchange, the association is asked to sign a broad release covering all claims, including known and unknown construction defects. To a new HOA board that received their community with limited operating and reserve funds, they are left with a difficult decision to either accept the developer’s offer or assess their owners to pay this alleged debt.
These agreements are occasionally presented through community management companies, which may describe them as “standard” or "routine.” Whether due to misunderstanding or influence from the developer, management companies can unintentionally reinforce the idea that signing is expected. Any recommendation provided to HOAs about whether to sign these releases could open community management to liability down the road. The best practice for both associations and community managers is to refer any agreements to be reviewed by general counsel for the association.
The following two case studies illustrate the real-world consequences:
Case Study One: A newly transitioned board relies on its management company to negotiate with the developer-builder to resolve irrigation issues, pond concerns, and signage deficiencies, along with forgiving an asserted financial shortfall. In exchange, the board signs a broad release covering all claims, including latent defects.
Within a year, several punch-list items remain incomplete, and more serious issues arise. When the association demands completion, the developer delays, prompting the association to seek advice on how to enforce the settlement agreement. The association hires counsel to hold the developer responsible for both the previously agreed-upon items and newly identified construction defects. However, when the association brings claims against the developer, the developer points to the release of all potential construction defects in the community. Thus, the only remaining remedy is limited to enforcement of the specific punch-list terms. The community, still relatively new, has no viable claims against the developer-builder for the construction defects. With warranties expired and the release, the association must fund repairs through special assessments, despite defects that would otherwise have been actionable.
Case Study Two: A community is presented with a similar agreement as above. The management company encourages execution, suggesting it is standard and even telling the board to “name your price.” The developer also pressures the newly elected board to sign.
Instead of signing, the board consults with their attorney. Counsel advises the board not to sign the release and recommends further investigation. Engineers are retained and identify early indicators of broader issues, including stucco cracking, water intrusion, and irrigation deficiencies. Based on this information, the association declines to sign the release. Subsequent evaluation reveals potentially significant construction-defect claims, allowing the community to pursue recovery that would have been lost under the proposed agreement.
These scenarios underscore a fundamental point: signing a release at turnover is not an administrative formality—it is a major legal decision. Board members act in a fiduciary capacity on behalf of their community, and their decisions can bind all current and future owners. At turnover, an association’s right is to investigate and pursue claims. Preserving that right until a full and independent evaluation is completed is not adversarial—it is responsible governance.
Accordingly, associations should retain independent evaluations of the property and consult qualified legal counsel before signing any “standard” agreements, especially ones involving a release of future claims.
Nicholas B. Vargo is a partner in Ball Janik LLP’s Construction Practice Group. He may be reached at nvargo@balljanik.com.
Parking Garage Partially Collapses in Dearborn, Mich., Trapping One
March 31, 2026 —
Annemarie Mannion - Engineering News-RecordA multi-level parking garage that partially collapsed in Dearborn, Mich., is fenced off and the city has started the legal process allowed under state law to demolish the privately-owned structure due to alleged dangerous conditions.
Read the full story...Reprinted courtesy of
Annemarie Mannion, Engineering News-RecordMs. Mannion may be contacted at
manniona@enr.com
HHMR Attorneys Steve Heisdorffer and Dave McLain Named to 2026 Super Lawyers List
April 08, 2026 —
Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLCHiggins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC is pleased to announce that Steve Heisdorffer and Dave McLain have been selected to the 2026 Colorado Super Lawyers list for construction litigation.
Mr. Heisdorffer has been consistently recognized in recent years for his work in construction litigation and related business disputes. Mr. McLain has been recognized by Super Lawyers each year from 2020
Ensuring Arbitration in Construction Defect ClaimsSigns of a Slowdown in Luxury CondosChristopher Leise Recognized by US News – Best Lawyers 2022 "Lawyer of the Year"Structure of Champlain Towers North Appears HealthyWashington Supreme Court Expands Contractor Notice ObligationsRighting Past Wrongs Through Equitable DevelopmentMexico’s Construction Industry Posts First Expansion Since 2012Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (8/21/24) – REITs Show Their Strength, Energy Prices Increase Construction Costs and CRE Struggles to Keep PaceReal Estate & Construction News Roundup (6/4/24) – New CRE Litmus Tests, Tech Integration in Real Estate and a Jump in Investor Home PurchasesDenial of Coverage For Bodily Injury After Policy Period Does Not Violate Public PolicyCalifornia Assembly Bill Proposes an End to Ten Year Statute of ReposeGiant Floating Solar Flowers Offer Hope for Coal-Addicted KoreaBlackouts Require a New Look at Backup PowerNavigating Federal Government Contracts Under Newly Imposed TariffsKeeping Up With Fast-moving FAA Drone RegulationsThe Role of Code Officials in the Design-Build ProcessCongratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected for the 2026 Edition of Best Lawyers and Best Lawyers: Ones to WatchPredicting the Future of Texas’s Grid Is a Texas-Sized Challenge2013 May Be Bay Area’s Best Year for Commercial BuildingDelaware Court Holds No Coverage for Faulty WorkmanshipJobsite Safety Should Be Every Contractors' PriorityArchitect Sues School DistrictCincinnati Team Secures Summary Judgment for Paving Company in Trip-and-Fall CaseCongratulations to Wilke Fleury’s 2023 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars!!California Court of Appeal Finds Coverage for Injured Worker Despite Contractor's ExclusionPublic Works Bid Protests – Who Is Responsible? Who Is Responsive?Five Years of Great Legal Blogging at Insurance Law HawaiiCity of Pawtucket Considering Forensic Investigation of TowerNaples, Florida, Is Getting So Expensive That City Workers Can’t Afford ItContract Void Ab Initio: Key Insights into the KBR vs. Corps of Engineers Affirmative DefenseCouple Claims Contractor’s Work Is Defective and IncompleteTop 10 Take-Aways: the ABA Forum's 2024 Mid-Winter MeetingWith VA Mechanic’s Liens Sometimes “Substantial Compliance” is Enough (but don’t count on it) [UPDATE]MDL for Claims Against Manufacturers and Distributors of PFAS-Containing AFFFs Focuses Attention on Key IssuesWhite and Williams Lawyers Recognized by Best LawyersInsurance for Defective Construction Now in Third EditionFederal Government May Go to Different Green Building StandardMendocino Hospital Nearing CompletionCalifornia Indemnity and Defense Construction Law Changes for 2013Houston’s High Housing Demand due to Employment Growth140 Days Until The California Consumer Privacy Act Becomes Law - Why Aren't More Businesses Complying?Homeowners Sue Over Sinkholes, Use Cash for Other ThingsOhio Supreme Court Holds No Occurence Arises from Subcontractor's Faulty WorkmanshipSick Leave, Paid Time Off, and the Families First Coronavirus Response Act Big Data Meets Big Green: Data Centers and Carbon Removal Compete for Zero-Emission EnergyActual Cost Value Includes Depreciation of Repair Labor CostsArchitect Named Grand Custom Home Winner for Triangular DesignNew Jersey Supreme Court Holding Impacts Allocation of Damages in Cases Involving Successive TortfeasorsInsured’s Bad Faith Insurance Claim Evaporates Before its EyesCalifornia Rejects Judgments By Confession Pursuant to Civil Code Section 1132y.php?cdjs=430058400">
Collapse of Breezeway Attached to Building CoveredHaight Welcomes New Attorneys to Los Angeles, Sacramento and San FranciscoIn New Orleans, Katrina Taught a Lesson in Local ResilienceWho Will Pay for San Francisco's $750 Million Tilting Tower?Grupo Mexico Spill Sparks Public Scrutiny of $150 Million Mop-UpConstruction Payment Remedies: You May be Able to Skate by, But Why?Megaproject Savings OpportunitiesGru Was Wrong About the Money: Court Concludes that Lender Owes Contractor “Contractually, Factually and Practically”Following My Own AdviceEquipment Costs? It’s a Steal!Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment on Business Interruption Claim DeniedCourt of Appeals Discusses Implied Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing in Public Works ContractingIt Pays to Review the ‘Review the Contract Documents’ Clause Before You Sign the ContractThe Jersey Shore gets Beach Prisms Designed to Reduce ErosionMercury Insurance Builds Climate Science Team to Tackle the Impact of Extreme Weather EventsChicago Aldermen Tell Casino Bidders: This Is a Union TownConstruction Defects Are Occurrences, Says South Carolina High CourtInsured Successfully Moves to Dismiss Insurer’s Suit to Eliminate Duty to Defend
