ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

White and Williams LLP Attorneys Recognized as PA and DE Super Lawyers

July 06, 2026 — White and Williams LLP
White and Williams LLP is proud to announce that eight attorneys in the firm’s Philadelphia office and one attorney in the firm's Delaware Office have been recognized on the 2026 Super Lawyers® and Rising Star lists. This recognition highlights our attorney's exceptional legal acumen and their commitment to client service excellence. Lawyers are selected for inclusion in Pennsylvania and Delaware Area Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars through a process that considers independent research, peer recognition and the professional achievements of attorneys from more than 70 practice areas. Approximately 2.5% of lawyers in each state are selected by the research team at Super Lawyers® to receive this honor. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

---

FERC Issues Show-Cause Orders: Impacts on California and Other Regional Power Markets

July 13, 2026 — Stephen J. Humes, Alicia M. McKnight & Jason Drogin Atwood - Gravel2Gavel Construction & Real Estate Law Blog
At an open meeting on June 18, 2026, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued show-cause orders under Section 206 of the Federal Power Act to the six FERC-jurisdictional RTOs/ISOs—PJM Interconnection, ISO New England, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Southwest Power Pool, New York Independent System Operator and California Independent System Operator—along with their transmission owners (TOs), directing each region and the TOs to justify or revise tariff provisions governing how data centers and other large loads connect to and receive transmission service from the grid. These show-cause orders will impact several power markets across the country, including California. Reprinted courtesy of Stephen J. Humes, Pillsbury, Alicia M. McKnight, Pillsbury and Jason Drogin Atwood, Pillsbury Mr. Humes may be contacted at stephen.humes@pillsburylaw.com Ms. McKnight may be contacted at alicia.mcknight@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Atwood may be contacted at jason.atwood@pillsburylaw.com Read the full story...

---

Structural Engineer Claims Reinforcement Was Never Installed on Troubled NYC Tower

September 01, 2026 — Bryan Gottlieb - Engineering News-Record
New York City has expanded its investigation into the structural failure at the former Pfizer headquarters tower in Midtown Manhattan as the Dept. of Investigation confirmed a parallel inquiry and the Dept. of Buildings directed the property owner to retain third-party engineering oversight. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Bryan Gottlieb, Engineering News-Record
Mr. Gottlieb may be contacted at gottliebb@enr.com

---

Ninth Circuit Holds That Policies Covering Environmental Claims Do Not Have Aggregate Limits

May 12, 2026 — Lorelie S. Masters & Joseph T. Niczky - Hunton Insurance Recovery Blog
In the case of County of San Bernardino v. Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania, the Ninth Circuit recently addressed the issue of whether general liability policies issued in the 1960s and 1970s included aggregate limits for claims arising under the premises-operations coverage in CGL policies. The difference between the policyholder’s interpretation of the policies’ limits clauses and the insurer’s interpretation was worth hundreds of millions of dollars in exposure for the insurer. The Court closely examined the policy language and extrinsic evidence from both the insurance industry’s drafting history and the parties before concluding that the policies were ambiguous. The Court construed that ambiguity in favor of the policyholder and ruled that aggregate limits did not apply to the claims at issue. The Court’s decision underscores the importance of carefully examining a policy’s limits, especially for older policies written before 1986 when the insurance industry revised the standard-form CGL policy to state the aggregate limits apply not only to products liability claims but to premises-operations claims as well. Decades of insurance industry drafting history confirms, as the policyholder’s submissions in this case indicate, that the industry well understood that operations claims like the environmental waste-disposal claims at issue here typically were not subject to aggregate limits. Reprinted courtesy of Lorelie S. Masters, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP and Joseph T. Niczky, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP Ms. Masters may be contacted at lmasters@hunton.com Mr. Niczky may be contacted at jniczky@hunton.com Read the full story...

---

Course of Construction Exclusions and the CGL Policy

July 20, 2026 — Anna M. Perry, Rachel S. Kindseth & Nina Catanzaro - Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
I. Course of Construction Exclusions Course of Construction (“COC”) exclusions are found on General Liability and excess liability policies, typically a wrap-up or project specific policy, and generally exclude “all property damage occurring during the course of construction.” Insurers claim COC exclusions are not problematic because they are intended to prevent an overlap in coverage between the general liability policy and first-party property Builder’s Risk policy. However, because General Liability policies and Builder’s Risk policies provide coverage for different risks, COC exclusions can create a gap in coverage for owners and contractors. Therefore, any exclusion on a wrap-up or project specific policy that limits coverage for property damage liability should be scrutinized, and amendments sought when warranted and commercially achievable, for owners, developers and contractors because General Liability policies do not cover the same risk as that of a Builder’s Risk policy. General liability policies provide defense and indemnity to the insured(s) for claims made by a third-party against the insured. Broad COC exclusions serve to preclude coverage for all property damage, not just property damage to the insured project. This includes property damage to property other than the insured project, e.g. an adjacent property. On the other hand, Builder’s Risk policies provide first-party property coverage for direct physical loss to the project during the course of construction. The Builder’s Risk policy will not provide coverage for property other than the project itself (e.g., adjacent property) and it will not provide a defense or indemnity in the event the owner of the damaged property brings a claim against a potentially at-fault party. Reprinted courtesy of Anna M. Perry, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C., Rachel S. Kindseth, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Nina Catanzaro, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Ms. Perry may be contacted at APerry@sdvlaw.com Ms. Kindseth may be contacted at rkindseth@sdvlaw.com Ms. Catanzaro may be contacted at NCatanzaro@sdvlaw.com Read the full story...

---

Your AEC Firm Has a Memory Problem. Here Is How to Fix It

June 01, 2026 — Aarni Heiskanen - AEC Business
AEC companies trying to operationalize AI often find they lack the data foundation on which to build. There may be an abundance of data hidden in documents, but you can’t reliably use it for AI. The lack of data quality was a key topic discussed at the AI in AEC 2026 conference. During the event, I met many experts working to solve this problem, including Pavlina Nikolova, Egnyte‘s EMEA AEC Practice Lead. The chat and her presentation highlighted the challenges and ways to overcome them. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

---

The Most Expensive Signature to Not Get: Why Change Orders Matter

August 16, 2026 — Kathryne E. Baldwin - Wilke Fleury
George Bernard Shaw has a quote we use a lot in my family: “The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.” This is pertinent to contractors and homeowners alike because the cost of failing to get proper signatures on documents like construction contracts, and particularly, change orders, is heavy. Both contractors and homeowners are in the same boat as far as wanting to complete a job as swiftly as possible: contractors go on to their next job and homeowners can return to peace in their home. This is prime territory for either party to suggest the work be completed today and the contract or change order executed tomorrow, or even later. However, without a contract, there is no memorialization of the communication between the parties, which can lead to confusion and missed expectations on both sides. Construction plans are rarely as neat and tidy as they originally seem to be. A contractor may uncover unforeseen conditions, an owner may request additional work or changes that require additional work, or weather interferes with project schedules or the work itself. Unfortunately, the signature that never gets collected can become one of the most expensive omissions on a project – for both sides. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Kathryne E. Baldwin, Wilke Fleury
Ms. Baldwin may be contacted at kbaldwin@wilkefleury.com

---

Insured General Contractor Prevails on Motion for Summary Judgment to Establish Builder’s Risk Coverage

July 06, 2026 — Tred R. Eyerly - Insurance Law Hawaii
The general contractor’s motion for partial summary judgment successfully est
Surety Bond Now a Valid Performance Guarantee for NC Developers (guest post)

Wendel Rosen Construction Attorneys Recognized by Super Lawyers and Best Lawyers

Mediation Scheduled for Singer's Construction Defect Claims

Federal Lawsuit Accuses MOX Contractors of Fraud

Insured's Remand of Bad Faith Action Granted

The Devil is in the Details: The Texas Construction Trust Fund Pitfalls Residential Remodelers (and General Contractors) Should Avoid

The Final Nail: Ongoing Repairs Do Not Toll the Statute of Repose

Armor Up: Fortifying Your Business Against California Litigation

Insurer Not Required to Show Prejudice from an Insured’s
A Relatively Small Exception to Fraud and Contract Don’t Mix

Consequential Damages Flowing from Construction Defect Not Covered Under Florida Law

California Supreme Court Finds that the Notice-Prejudice Rule Applicable to Insurance is a Fundamental Public Policy of the State

Insurer’s Duty to Defend: When is it Triggered? When is it Not?

Rooftop Owners Sue Cubs Consultant for Alleged False Statements

Indemnity Payment to Insured Satisfies SIR

Georgia Law: “An Occurrence Can Arise Where Faulty Workmanship Causes Unforeseen or Unexpected Damage to Other Property”

Couple Sues Attorney over Construction Defect Case, Loses

Construction Litigation Roundup: “Stop - In the Name of the Law!”

California Court Invokes Equity to Stretch Anti-Subrogation Rule Principles

New Jersey Law Firm Sued for Malpractice in Construction Defect Litigation

When a Request for Equitable Adjustment Should Be Treated as a Claim Under the Contract Disputes Act

Homebuilding Held Back by Lack of Skilled Workers

Is it the End of the Story for Redevelopment in California?

Puerto Rico Grid Restoration Plagued by Historic Problems, New Challenges

What if the "Your Work" Exclusion is Inapplicable? ISO Classification and Construction Defect Claims.

Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion on Business Risk Exclusions Fails

Payment Bond Claim Notice Requires More than Mailing

Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series, Part 3: Standard Form Policy Exclusions

Texas Allows Wide Scope for Certificate of Merit

Caveat Emptor (“Buyer Beware!”) Exceptions

Kahana Feld LLP Senior Attorney Rachael Marvin and Partner Dominic Donato Obtain Complete Dismissal of Plaintiff’s Labor Law Claims on Summary Judgment

Minimum Wage on Federal Construction Projects is $10.10

Defects in Texas High School Stadium Angers Residents

Lack of Workers Holding Back Building

Chutes and Ladders...and Contracts.

Carroll Brock of Larchmont Homes Dies at Age 88

Connecticut Supreme Court Further Refines Meaning of "Collapse"

Proving & Defending Lost Profit Damages

SDNY Vacates Arbitration Award for Party-Arbitrator’s Nondisclosures

Construction Contract Basics: Venue and Choice of Law

Delaware Supreme Court Won’t Halt Building

The Modern Nuclear Renaissance Reaches New England

Balancing the Right to Repair With Evidence Preservation in Construction Defect Litigation

It’s Getting Harder and Harder to be a Concrete Supplier in California

Small to Midsize Builders Making Profit on Overlooked Lots

Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Listed in the Best Lawyers in America© 2017

Construction Contract Clauses That May or May Not Have Your Vote – Part 3

Construction Litigation Roundup: “A Close Call?”

Homeowners Sued for Failing to Disclose Defects

Adapting Standard Construction Forms for Use in Overseas Hospitality Renovations

Strategic Implementation of AI in AEC

WSHB Managing Partner Chad Dunigan Named Finalist for Jerrold S. Oliver "Ollie" Award of Excellence

Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected for the 2024 Edition of Best Lawyers and Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch

Chambers USA Names Peckar & Abramson to Band 1 Level in Construction Law; 29 P&A Lawyers Recognized as Leading Attorneys; Six Regions and Government Contracts Practice Recognized

Home Prices on the Rise

Guilty Pleas Draw Renewed Interest In Nevada’s Construction Defect Laws

Construction Litigation Roundup: “The Jury Is Still Out”

Ahlers Cressman & Sleight leads in recognized Construction Litigation Attorneys

Reminder: A Little Pain Now Can Save a Lot of Pain Later