Builders standard of care expert witness Forensic architect expert witness Baldwin Florida Florida Florida Expert Witness Engineer Directory

Wildfires, Silica Exposures and ESG-Friendly Solutions

August 18, 2025 — David Rios - Construction Executive
After a wildfire, the air is thick with smoke and the scent of burnt vegetation - remnants of a once vibrant landscape now reduced to charred earth. The rebuilding process includes assessing fire risks and implementing strategies to improve resilience against future wildfires. But even after the fires have subsided, the danger remains. Dust and debris can hide harmful contaminants, such as crystalline silica, which pose health risks to construction workers. With wildfires becoming more frequent and intense, the industry's risk of silica exposure is a pressing concern. Artificial stone has increased this risk due to the higher levels of silica released. Addressing these risks is essential for occupational safety and is critical in environmental, social and governance strategies. By adopting comprehensive ESG solutions, construction firms can protect their workforce, comply with health and safety regulations, and commit to sustainable practices. Crystalline Silica and Silicosis Crystalline silica is a mineral found in concrete, brick and sand, as well as in the ash and dust from wildfires. When these materials are disturbed, tiny silica particles can become airborne. Inhaling these particles poses serious health risks, leading to conditions such as lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and silicosis. Consequently, breathing in silica dust after wildfires is a significant health concern that cannot be understated. Reprinted courtesy of David Rios, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

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...

Motions to Dismiss, Limitations of Liability, and More

August 12, 2025 — Christopher G. Hill - Construction Law Musings
Remember BAE Sys. Ordnance Sys. V. Fluor Fed. Sols? I examined that case on two occasions previously here at Construction Law Musings. Previously the discussions were about the mix (or lack thereof) between fraud and contract and about how careful contract drafting is key. In the most recent opinion in this ongoing litigation from March of 2022, the Court examined various motions to dismiss the Complaint and Counterclaim in the matter. As a reminder, the basic facts are as follows. The US Army Joint Munitions Command (“Army”) contracted with BAE Systems OrdnanceSystems, Inc. (“BAE”) to operate and maintain the Radford Army Ammunition Plant (“RFAAP”)under a basic ordering agreement (“BOA”). Under BOA Task Order 002, BAE contracted to replace the legacy NC facility at the RFAAP with a newer one (the “NC Project”). Initially, BAE subcontracted the NC Project to Lauren Engineers & Constructors (“Lauren”), but later terminated Lauren. Despite terminating Lauren, BAE’s timeline to complete the NC Project remained unchanged and BAE was required to use Lauren’s design for the NC Project. BAE gave interested bidders access to the Lauren design and other related documents and required the selected subcontractor to perform in accordance with the 85% complete Lauren design, that the Lauren design could be relied on for accuracy, and the selected subcontractor only had to complete the unfinished parts. Fluor Federal Solutions, LLC (“Fluor”) submitted a request for information (“RFI”) asking BAE about the standards referenced in the SOW. Fluor was unable to determine the completeness of the Lauren design but relied on BAE’s assertion that the design was 85% complete. BAE rejected Fluor’s initial bid as being too high given what BAE had already paid Lauren for its design and told Fluor to lower its bid because the design was close to complete. Fluor lowered its price and submitted another bid proposal that outlined a firm-fixed-price design/build that forecasted 32 months to complete the NC Project. BAE awarded Fluor an Undefinitized Contract Action (“UCA”) in the amount of $9 million dollars, later increased to $32 million. Under the UCA, Fluor began procuring materials and physical construction before a formal subcontract was agreed upon. On December 17, 2015, BAE and Fluor agreed to a fixed-price design and build subcontract (the “Subcontract”) in which Fluor agreed to design, construct, and partially commission the NC Project for $245,690,422.00, which included money spent already in the UCA. When this litigation began, Fluor was scheduled to complete its work by December 2020, 2.5 years beyond the originally agreed-upon completion date. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (7/30/25) – Data Centers in Space, Low-Income Housing Problems and Spike in Multifamily Completions

September 03, 2025 — Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team - Gravel2Gavel Construction & Real Estate Law Blog
In our latest roundup, more office space is being demolished/converted than built, Landingplace Hotels launches two conversation brands, developers cite expenses with low-income housing, and more!

A new White House directive aims to accelerate federal permitting and unlock financial incentives for large-scale data center builds, along with related energy and manufacturing projects. (Sebastian Obando, Construction Dive)
Landingplace Hotels launches two midscale conversion brands with Landingplace Suites aiming to bridge the gap between extended stay hotels and furnished apartments, and Landingplace Select serving short-term guests. (Noelle Mateer, Hotel Dive)
Multifamily completions reached 608,000 units in 2024, the highest level since 1986. (Leslie Shaver, Multifamily Dive)

Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

Learning a Lesson by Sweating the Small Stuff

July 01, 2025 — Corey S. Lloyd - The Dispute Resolver
When negotiating contracts, it is sometimes difficult to properly assess the risks and rewards of certain terms. The idiom “that one can’t see the forest through the trees” comes to mind. At times, though, even determining which forest needs to be seen can be the bigger challenge. We are all informed by our experiences and “battle wounds” – sometimes to our own detriment. Recently, my client and I considered a contract provision which many of our clients likely believe is an elementary exercise: the number of adverse weather days that should be included in a prime contract. This exercise led us to some surprising conclusions and forced us to consider whether we were overlooking other seemingly routine contractual provisions. Let’s assume that an owner and general contractor are negotiating a prime contract on a private project. Consider the following two options from the perspectives of each of these two stakeholders. The first perspective will be that of an owner who has experience writing “too many change orders” for weather days. The second perspective will be from a contractor who “never gets enough time for weather.” Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Corey S. Lloyd, Riess LeMieux
Mr. Lloyd may be contacted at clloyd@rllaw.com

Executive Insights 2025: Leaders in Construction Law

June 09, 2025 — Construction Executive
How does incorporating dispute resolution into a contract along with procedures to encourage transparency and collaboration among parties help when an issue arises? Bryan Thomas Partner Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP Dispute provisions should be designed to encourage transparency and collaboration. In my 17 years advising on construction projects and litigating those that cannot be reasonably resolved, I have observed that those that reach the courtroom or an arbitration panel remain unresolved because of the dispute process, the associated costs and the related leverage provided by the contractual structure of the process. My advice on the front-end is twofold: have a useful mediation provision and develop a practical fee-shifting provision to encourage real exchanges and resolution. While early non-binding dispute procedures, like DRBs, can be helpful on the largest of projects, an early mediation requirement is more practical and helpful for most projects. The key is making sure all parties are encouraged to meaningfully participate in the mediation. Thus, linking a mediation requirement with a carefully crafted fee-shifting provision can encourage mutual engagement, drive transparency and collaboration throughout the process, and ultimately lead to resolution rather than incurring the significant costs associated with fighting in the dispute process. My recommendation is to develop a fee provision that objectively requires the parties to set their own binding bar for determining the “prevailing party.” That can be achieved through the required exchange of early written offers “X” days after (or before) mediation, trial or both. Nothing can be more sobering to all parties than considering the possibility of having to pay both parties’ legal fees. Not surprisingly, most contracts that incorporate this approach result in the transparency needed for efficient and early resolution. Reprinted courtesy of Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

The LA Fires Destroyed 11,000 Homes. Less Than 10% Have Permits to Rebuild

October 27, 2025 — Michelle Ma & John Gittelsohn - Bloomberg
Of the thousands of residents needing to rebuild after this year’s California wildfires, Andy Weyman would seem especially well positioned. The TV and stage director had remodeled his Malibu home just five years earlier and had city-approved blueprints in hand, with the same architect set to oversee reconstruction. Yet eight months after the Palisades Fire destroyed almost 600 Malibu houses, the city has issued only two rebuilding permits. Weyman needed geological tests to ensure the stability of his bluff-top lot. Construction costs are roughly double his insurance coverage. In August, his architect died. Reprinted courtesy of Michelle Ma, Bloomberg and John Gittelsohn, Bloomberg Read the full story...

Federal Court Upholds Uninsured Contractor Endorsement; Finds Duty to Defend Anyway

November 04, 2025 — Craig Rokuson - Traub Lieberman
In the recent case of LM Ins. Corp. v. James River Ins. Co., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 189320 (S.D.N.Y. Sep. 25, 2025), the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York had occasion to interpret an Uninsured Contractor Endorsement in the context of an additional insured tender. After a construction accident, the owner and general contractor tendered to a subcontractor, DATO, who had hired plaintiff's employer, Star. Investigations later revealed that DATO did not have a written contract with Star for the work at issue. DATO's insurer, Arch, denied any obligation to provide coverage to all parties seeking coverage, including additional insureds, based on DATO's failure to comply with the "New York Limitation Endorsement," which requires that "you," defined to be Arch's named insured, obtain certain pass through protections from subcontractors for New York projects, including a written contract. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Craig Rokuson, Traub Lieberman
Mr. Rokuson may be contacted at crokuson@tlsslaw.com

BUILDERS STANDARD OF CARE EXPERT WITNESS FORENSIC ARCHITECT EXPERT WITNESS BALDWIN FLORIDA FLORIDA FLORIDA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES