Differing Site Conditions Claim Requires a Misrepresentation
May 14, 2026 —
David Adelstein - Florida Construction Legal UpdatesIf you are entertaining a
differing site conditions claim, consider this Third District Court of Appeals case from the mid-90s.
In Hendry Corp. v. Metropolitan Dade County, 648 So.2d 140 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995), a contractor was hired by Dade County to demolish the old Rickenbacker Causeway in Miami. The original 1941 plans of the causeway were made available to contractors. The lowest bidding contractor that was awarded the project based its bid “on its conclusion that the pilings supporting the old bridge were made of concrete.” Hendry, supra at 141. The contractor based this conclusion on the original plans, its visual observation, and experience.
Read the full story...Reprinted courtesy of
David Adelstein, Kirwin NorrisMr. Adelstein may be contacted at
dma@kirwinnorris.com
Managing Rising Costs and Shifting Legal Risk for Florida High-Rise and Condominium Projects
May 05, 2026 —
Stephen Hauptman - Ball Janik LLPFlorida's construction defect landscape is experiencing a major shift. The convergence of material and labor cost volatility, regulatory tightening, and increasingly complex litigation strategies is forcing associations, developers, and their counsel to rethink how they approach risk management and dispute resolution. For those managing large-scale condo and high-rise projects, the stakes have never been higher.
The Cost Volatility Trap
Construction material prices rose at a "staggering" 12.6% annualized rate during the first two months of 2026, according to
recent industry analysis. Tariff impacts are projected to lead to more increases of 5.4% to 6.8%, depending on property type. For associations facing construction defect claims, this volatility creates a cascading problem: repair scopes defined two years ago are now dramatically underpriced, and damage calculations that appeared reasonable at discovery are obsolete by the time of settlement.
Courts and mediators are increasingly scrutinizing how cost estimates were developed and whether they account for existing market circumstances. Associations must now commission updated repair assessments more frequently, a practice that increases investigation costs but strengthens the credibility of damage claims. Conversely, defendants are weaponizing cost inflation as a defense, arguing that claimed damages are speculative or inflated. The practical result: repair sequencing and phasing strategies have become critical litigation tools. Associations that can demonstrate a rational, cost-effective repair plan tied to current market data are more favorably placed in settlement negotiations.
Regulatory Pressure and Deliberate Timing
Florida's 2026 condo compliance regime has significantly changed the defect claims landscape. Elevated transparency requirements, stricter reserve funding mandates, and tightened building safety inspection protocols mean that associations now face dual pressures: Comply with new regulations while simultaneously handling construction defect exposure.
This regulatory environment is changing investigation and documentation strategy. Associations that delay defect investigation to avoid triggering reserve funding obligations or disclosure requirements are taking on considerable legal risk. Recent case law such as the Third District Court of Appeal's reaffirmation of Chapter 558's pre-suit mediation requirements, underscores Florida's intent to resolve disputes early. Associations that move deliberately and record carefully during the pre-suit phase gain leverage in mediation and reduce the risk of expensive litigation.
Timing also intersects with repair sequencing. Associations must now balance the urgency of compliance inspections against the strategic advantage of phased repairs. Some associations are using compliance deadlines as a forcing mechanism to accelerate settlement discussions, while others are sequencing repairs to demonstrate good-faith remediation efforts before litigation commences.
The Emerging Risk Transfer Challenge
As construction defect claims grow more complex and costly, the traditional risk transfer systems, such as design-build warranties, contractor bonds, and insurance, are proving inadequate. Developers and general contractors are increasingly shifting risk to subcontractors and material suppliers, fragmenting liability and complicating recovery efforts for associations. Permitting and approval friction is also creating new litigation pressure points. Delays in municipal approvals, changes to building code interpretations, and disputes over remedial work compliance continue to spawn collateral claims that go beyond the original defect. Associations must now anticipate not only defect liability but also regulatory compliance disputes with municipalities, creating a dual-front legal challenge.
For large communities, this means reconsidering the entire risk architecture. Insurance carriers are tightening coverage, and traditional indemnification chains are breaking down. Forward-thinking associations are engaging counsel earlier in the development process to negotiate clearer risk allocation provisions and more robust insurance requirements.
Taking a Data-Driven Approach
Managing rising costs and shifting legal risk in Florida's high-rise and condo market requires a more sophisticated, data-driven approach. Associations must commission frequent cost updates, move deliberately through pre-suit investigation and mediation, and challenge traditional assumptions about risk transfer. Developers and their counsel should view regulatory compliance not as a burden but as an opportunity to demonstrate good-faith risk management and strengthen settlement positioning.
The firms and associations that succeed in 2026 will be those that treat cost volatility, regulatory change, and litigation strategy not as separate challenges but as linked elements of a coherent risk management framework.
Stephen Hauptman is special counsel in Ball Janik LLP’s Fort Lauderdale office. He may be reached at shauptman@balljanik.com.
Colorado Court Affirms Attorneys’ Fee Award Against Plaintiff’s Counsel for Pursuing Unsupported CCPA Claims
August 03, 2026 —
David McLain - Colorado Construction Litigation BlogThe Colorado Court of Appeals recently affirmed a trial court’s award of more than $241,000 in attorney fees against a plaintiffs’ attorney who continued to pursue unsupported claims arising out of a residential construction dispute. Although the opinion was not selected for official publication under C.A.R. 35(e) and therefore has no precedential value, it nevertheless provides an instructive reminder that Colorado courts are willing to impose significant financial consequences when claims lack substantial justification.
For builders, developers, contractors, insurers, and defense counsel, the case is worth reading, not because it announces new law, but because it demonstrates that Colorado’s fee-shifting statute remains a meaningful tool when unsupported claims continue long after they should have been abandoned.
Read the full story...Reprinted courtesy of
David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLCMr. McLain may be contacted at
mclain@hhmrlaw.com
White and Williams LLP is Proud to Host the 20th Anniversary Virginia Barton Wallace Award and Reception
May 05, 2026 —
White and Williams LLPWhite and Williams LLP is proud to host the 20th Anniversary Virginia Barton Wallace (VBW) Award and Reception, which will celebrate this year’s honoree,
The Rendell Center for Civics & Civic Engagement. This award was created to celebrate the remarkable career of Virginia “Ginny” Barton Wallace, the first woman to be elected to partnership not only at White and Williams but also at any law firm in Philadelphia. The VBW Award is presented to a woman or organization that embodies the same qualities that Ginny possessed: leadership, drive, exemplary work ethic, overall excellence in her field, or an ability to inspire other women to succeed.
Read the full story...Reprinted courtesy of
White and Williams LLP
No Bad Faith Despite Insurer’s Appraisal Award Exceeding Initial Payment
August 03, 2026 —
Tred R. Eyerly - Insurance Law HawaiiThe federal district court granted the insurer’s motion for summary judgment, finding no bad faith despite the appraisal award exceeding the amount the insurer initially paid. Jazi Kat 4659 Rockridge LLC, et al. v. Travelers Cas. Ins. Co. of Am., et al., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105634 (D. Ariz. May 13, 2026).
Plaintiffs sued Travelers for breach of contract and bad faith, alleging that Travelers failed to pay money plaintiffs were owed under the policy. Plaintiffs held a commercial property policy for two properties. A fire destroyed one of the properties. Travelers adjusted the claim and issued two payments. Plaintiffs disagreed with the amount of the payments and demanded an appraisal. Travelers agreed to the appraisal.
Read the full story...Reprinted courtesy of
Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak HastertMr. Eyerly may be contacted at
te@hawaiilawyer.com
Nevada’s Mandatory Nonbinding Arbitration Law for Civil Cases is Going Through Changes
May 14, 2026 —
Brandon Wright & Manuel Gurule - Lewis BrisboisNevada currently operates an expedited litigation program designed to resolve civil disputes with a value up to $50,000 without incurring the “usual” expense of litigating these disputes. Over time, however, the number of civil cases that have been “exempted” from this program based on the claimed damages exceeding $50,000 has grown dramatically. In response, the Nevada Legislature recently enacted a number of rule changes designed to streamline Nevada’s arbitration process and include more cases. Among these changes are increasing the arbitration “cap” from $50,000 to $100,000.
By way of background, the Nevada’s Court Annexed Arbitration program is a mandatory, non-binding program for civil cases in judicial districts that have county populations of 100,000 or more [1]. Nevada’s Court Annexed Arbitration was born out of NRS 38.250, which was enacted in 1991 and went into effect in the summer of 1992. The newly enacted NRS 38.250 was regarded as a way to address the problem of increased court caseloads while promoting judicial economy and efficiency in civil cases having a probable jury award of less than $25,000 [2]. Initially, cases that were automatically exempt from the program included class actions, medical malpractice disputes, divorce proceedings, and other domestic relations matters [3].
Reprinted courtesy of
Brandon Wright, Lewis Brisbois and
Manuel Gurule, Lewis Brisbois
Mr. Wright may be contacted at Brandon.Wright@lewisbrisbois.com
Mr. Gurule may be contacted at Manuel.Gurule@lewisbrisbois.com
What You Need to Know About “Ipso Facto” Clauses and Their Impact on Termination of a Contractor or Subcontractor in a BankruptcyOrlando Commercial Construction Permits Double in ValueWhy Do Construction Companies Fail?Automating Your Home? There’s an App for ThatCollaborating or Competing with Construction Tech StartupsTax Increase Pumps $52 Billion Into California ConstructionFive Haight Attorneys Selected for Best Lawyers in America© 2021Bridge Disaster - Italy’s Moment of TruthLos Angeles Delays ‘Mansion Tax’ Spending Amid Legal FightInsurer Must Defend Construction Defect ClaimsNinth Circuit Issues Injunction Halting SB 261 Climate Disclosure LawsUS Supreme Court Backs Panama Canal Owner in Dispute with BuildersNevada Supreme Court Declares Subcontractor Not Required to Provide Pre-Litigation Notice to SupplierExtreme Rainfall Is Becoming More Frequent and DeadlyMandatory Energy Benchmarking is On Its WayAlleged Serious Defects at Hanford Nuclear Waste Treatment PlantConsider Manner In Which Loan Agreement (Promissory Note) Is DraftedThe Pandemic, Proposed Federal Privacy Regulation and the CCPAFour Key Steps for a Successful Construction Audit ProcessCourt Conditionally Grants Mandamus Relief to Compel AppraisalRetainage: What Contractors Need to Know and Helpful StrategiesBusiness Insurance Names Rachel Hudgins Among 2024 Break Out Award WinnersWithdrawal Liability? Read your CBATemporary Obstructions Are a Permanent Problem Under the Americans with Disabilities ActMassachusetts High Court to Decide if Insurers Can Recoup Defense CostsConstruction Workers Face Dangers on the JobTall Mass Timber Buildings Now Possible Under 2021 IBC Code ChangesSchool District Gets Expensive Lesson on Prompt Payment Law. But Did the Court Get it Right?Chambers Global 2026 Recognizes Sheppard Practices and AttorneysJPMorgan Blamed for ‘Zombie’ Properties in Miami LawsuitAcord Certificates of Liability Insurance: What They Don’t Tell You Can Hurt YouOrlando Commercial Construction Permits Double in ValueHomeowner Loses Suit against Architect and Contractor of Resold HomeIs Your Design Professional Construction Contract too Friendly? (Law Note)Courts Will Not Second-Guess Public Entities When it Comes to Design ImmunityReinsurer Must Reimburse Health Care Organization for Settlement CostsDon’t Get Caught Holding the Bag: Hold the State Liable When General Contractor Fails to Pay on a Public ProjectBrazil’s Former President Turns Himself In to PoliceGood and Bad News on Construction EmploymentInsurer Granted Summary Judgment on Denial of Construction Defect ClaimFree Texas MCLE Seminar at BHA Houston June 13thProfessional Liability Alert: Joint Client Can't Claim Privilege For Communications With Attorney Sued By Another Joint ClientBreaking Down Homeowners Association Laws In CaliforniaWant More Transit (and Federal Funding)? Build Housing That Supports ItPanel Declares Colorado Construction Defect Laws Reason for Lack of Multifamily DevelopmentsWaive It Goodbye: Despite Evidence to the Contrary, Delaware Upholds an AIA Waiver of Subrogation ClauseIn Contracts, One Word Makes All the DifferenceDeadlines Count for Construction Defects in FloridaSeveral Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in Sacramento Magazine 2022 Top Lawyers!Corporate Formalities: A Necessary Part of Business Client Alert: Absence of a Court Reporter at a Civil Motion Hearing May Preclude Appellate ReviewFight for Your Right: Effects of FAR Final Rule on ConstructionCourt of Appeal: Privette Doctrine Does Not Apply to Landlord-Tenant RelationshipsBuffalo, NY Stadium Work Resumes After Suspects ID'ed in $150K Graffiti VandalismVancouver’s George Massey Tunnel Replacement May Now be a Tunnel Instead of a BridgeIllinois Couple Files Suit Against Home BuilderIt's a Wrap! Enforcing Online Agreements in Light of the CPRAThe Impact of the Russia-Ukraine Conflict on the Insurance Industry, Part One: Coverage, Exposure, and LossesNo Coverage for Collapse of BuildingCongratulations to Nicholas Rodriguez on His Promotion to PartnerHolding the Bag for Pre-Tender Defense CostsFifth Circuit Concludes Government’s CAA Legal Claims are Time-Barred But Injunctive-Relief Claims are NotHome Building Up in Kansas CityAbsent Separate Covered Peril, Ensuing Loss is Not ApplicableVirginia Families Hope to Sue over Chinese DrywallNew Case Law Alert: Licensed General Contractors Cannot Sue Owners to Recover Funds for Work Performed by An Unlicensed SubcontractorConcerns About On-the-job Safety PersistEvaluating Construction Trends From 2023 and Forecasting For 2024Will Millennial’s Desire for Efficient Spaces Kill the McMansion?Washington Trial Court Narrows Definition of First Party Claimant, Clarifies Available Causes of Action in Commercial Property Loss Context
