Anaheim California Roofing Expert Witness Directory

High-Rise Design and Construction: Then, Now, and Next

March 16, 2026 — Aarni Heiskanen - AEC Business
The Empire State Building was built in 14 months. Since 2010, the average completion time for a 200-meter-plus building has increased from 4.3 to 5.8 years. Buildings have become more complex, and there's more regulation than in the 1930s. Still, there are ways to make high-rise construction more efficient. An Unlikely Benchmark From 1930 When construction began on the Empire State Building on March 17, 1930, the world was in the midst of the Great Depression. That turned out to be an advantage. Contractors Starrett Brothers & Eken had access to a vast, motivated workforce, peaking at 3,439 workers on a single day in August 1930. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

50 State Matrices | 2026 Edition

March 03, 2026 — Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani
GRSM’s 50 State Legal Matrices provide a comprehensive, state-by-state snapshot of statutory law across all 50 U.S. states. Spanning critical areas such as indemnification, contractor licensing, labor standards, statute of limitations, and more, this resource enables businesses and counsel to quickly identify key legal requirements and variations across jurisdictions. Designed as a practical starting point rather than definitive legal advice, the Matrices help multi-state operators and attorneys navigate the complex patchwork of laws that can vary dramatically from one state to another. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani

Identifying Unfair Clauses in Construction Contracts

February 17, 2026 — Curtis W. Martin - Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
In 1979, virtually all projects were completed under form contracts. As I started practicing construction law, it seemed that most form contracts were generally fair. They were negotiated by industry groups and over the next 10-20 years they appeared to become fairer. We could and did compare provisions in the AIA documents, the Federal contract forms, and the EJCDC agreements. When we did, we found subtle differences, but broad similarities in their approach to contract risk allocation. Today many (most?) private projects are done with “manuscript” contracts – instruments tailored to the owner’s interests. And many public entities have developed their own contracts. And not all those clauses seem so fair. This month I focus on contract clauses that I consider unfair. And while unfairness, like beauty, may be in the eye of the beholder, I think that the clauses described below aptly fit that descriptor. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Curtis W. Martin, Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@pecklaw.com

Shiloh and Vallejo: The DOI Tale of Two Properties

October 20, 2025 — Heidi McNeil Staudenmaier & Caitlin Vanderkarr - Snell & Wilmer
California courts have certainly been busy as of late. In particular, challenges abound as to the Department of the Interior (the DOI) and its decisions to take certain parcels of land into trust for the purpose of rendering such parcels eligible for gaming activities by certain California tribes. The DOI Shiloh Parcel Dispute The Shiloh parcel, a tract of land the DOI previously approved as land taken into trust for gaming purposes under the restored lands exception of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) on behalf of the Koi Nation of Northern California (The Koi), has been the subject of considerable controversy. Reprinted courtesy of Heidi McNeil Staudenmaier, Snell & Wilmer and Caitlin Vanderkarr, Snell & Wilmer Ms. Staudenmaier may be contacted at hstaudenmaier@swlaw.com Ms. Vanderkarr may be contacted at cvanderkarr@swlaw.com Read the full story...

ZEC 2.0: New York’s Zero Emissions Credit Program Gets an Extension and a Reboot

February 10, 2026 — Stephen J. Humes & Jason Drogin Atwood - Gravel2Gavel Construction & Real Estate Law Blog
In a landmark move that could shape New York’s energy landscape for decades, state officials have taken steps to both preserve its existing nuclear power facilities and significantly expand its advanced nuclear capacity. These actions are part of a broader strategy to maintain grid reliability and meet both escalating energy demand and the state’s ambitious greenhouse gas reduction and zero carbon goals. Renewing the Zero Emissions Credit Program On January 22, 2026, the New York Public Services Commission (PSC) unanimously voted to extend and reboot the Zero Emissions Credit program (now called ZEC 2.0) to ensure that New York’s four upstate nuclear reactors maintain operations through 2049. The program, which began in 2016, is designed to provide revenue subsidies for legacy nuclear facilities that have been facing financial difficulties in New York’s competitive wholesale power markets. State officials have stated that the benefits of ensuring the continued operations of these reactors far outweigh the costs due to the lack of zero-emissions alternatives and the importance of ensuring grid reliability in the face of escalating energy demand from large loads like data centers. Reprinted courtesy of Stephen J. Humes, Pillsbury and Jason Drogin Atwood, Pillsbury Mr. Humes may be contacted at stephen.humes@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Atwood may be contacted at jason.atwood@pillsburylaw.com Read the full story...

Recovering Attorney’s Fees and Arguing the Fees Are Inextricably Intertwined

December 02, 2025 — David Adelstein - Florida Construction Legal Updates
Attorney’s fees are a big part of any dispute. And the attorney’s fees should be because fees are a factor and can ultimately drive the outcome of a dispute. No one wants to spend $100,000 in fees to recover $100,000, so the conversation regarding attorney’s fees needs to be had early. Generally, a party can recover reasonable attorney’s fees if authorized by contract or by statute. So, there would need to be a prevailing party attorney’s fees provision in a contract, if suing on a contract, or there would need to be a statute authorizing the recovery of attorney’s fees, if suing on a statute. Then, there is authority that the party still needs to prevail on the significant issues in the dispute, as determined by the trial court (or binding arbitrator), in order to be the prevailing party for purposes of attorney’s fees. (Absent that, you are dealing with a proposal for settlement to create a procedural basis to recover fees, which is explained here.) Reasonable attorney’s fees, however, does not mean you will recover 100% of your attorney’s fees. Some percentage will presumably be discounted meaning becoming 100% whole when factoring in attorney’s fees is not always a practical outlook. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

Second Circuit Revives Policyholder’s Negligence Claim Against Agent

December 08, 2025 — Latosha M. Ellis, Geoffrey B. Fehling & Yosef Itkin - Hunton Insurance Recovery Blog
From insurance agents and wholesalers to risk consultants and policyholders, there are many parties involved in commercial insurance transactions. While each has an important part to play, the policyholder-agent relationship is particularly important to ensure both sides understand their respective roles and obligations when an agent assists in obtaining coverage. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals recently provided important guidance under New York law about the scope of an insurance agent’s responsibilities, particularly when an agent, at a policyholder’s request, expressly takes on tasks beyond simply procuring coverage. The decision underscores that an agent’s obligations can extend beyond standard procurement duties by express agreement, though the outcome could differ under the law of another jurisdiction. Reprinted courtesy of Latosha M. Ellis, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP, Geoffrey B. Fehling, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP and Yosef Itkin, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP Ms. Ellis may be contacted at lellis@hunton.com Mr. Fehling may be contacted at gfehling@hunton.com Mr. Itkin may be contacted at yitkin@hunton.com Read the full story...

When Rule 702 Motions Fail: A Close Look at AECOM v. Flatiron

February 02, 2026 — Olivia Barden - Colorado Construction Litigation Blog
In AECOM Tech. Servs., Inc. v. Flatiron | AECOM, LLC, 2024 WL 22640 (D. Colo. 2024), the United States District Court for the District of Colorado addressed when expert testimony is not subject to be limited or excluded pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 702. Background In 2015, AECOM Technical Services, Inc. (“AECOM”) and Flatiron | AECOM, LLC (“Flatiron”) entered into an agreement, in which they agreed to work together to assemble a design/build team for the purposes of submitting a proposal to the Colorado Department of Transportation’s (“CDOT”) construction project known as C-470 Tolled Express Lanes Segment 1 Design-Build Project (the “Project”). AECOM provided the design and engineering services, and Flatiron submitted the proposal to CDOT. On or about June 16, 2016, CDOT awarded Flatiron the Project. Flatiron later claimed that AECOM’s design failed to follow basic engineering and project requirements. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC

ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA ROOFING EXPERT WITNESS DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES