Anaheim California Construction Expert Witness Directory

Tampa Team Obtains Highly Favorable Verdict for Property Owner Client in Lawsuit over Traffic Accident

March 24, 2026 — Lewis Brisbois Newsroom
Tampa Managing Partner John Rine and Partner Nick Dareneau obtained a very favorable verdict for their property owner client in a Sarasota County trial in a lawsuit arising from a traffic accident. At the end of closing arguments, plaintiff’s counsel requested appropriately $18 million from the jury. The jury returned a net verdict of just over a thousand dollars. The plaintiff was on a scooter and was involved in an accident with an SUV in a parking lot intersection. Our firm represented the property owner. The plaintiffs argued that the landscape vegetation was too tall and violated the sight lines of the two drivers, and that the height of the shrubbery violated the owner’s landscaping contract and a local sight line ordinance. They also argued that the intersection lacked a stop sign in contrast to the other six parking lot entrances, which had stop signs. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

Additional Insureds Owed a Defense in Underlying Personal Injury Suit

March 03, 2026 — Tred R. Eyerly - Insurance Law Hawaii
The court granted partial summary judgment on the duty to defend to two additional insureds who were named as defendants in the underlying personal injury suit. In re Third St. Equity, LLC, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 234909 (E.D. N. Y. Dec. 2, 2025). Third Street Equity LLD hired Developing NY State, LLC as the contractor for a construction project. Developing NY entered a subcontract agreement with Capital Source Concrete NY LLC for concrete work as well as labor and services for a construction project. The subcontract required that Capital Concrete keep the construction site free of debris, waste material or rubbish. Further, Capital Concrete was responsible for compliance with OSHA safety regulations. It was also agreed that Capital Concrete would obtain liability and workers compensation insurance naming Third Street and Developing NY as additional insureds. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

You Should’ve Known: Colorado Holds Defendant May Have Pre-Litigation Duty to Preserve Evidence

October 06, 2025 — Gus Sara - The Subrogation Strategist
In Terra Mgmt. Grp., LLC v. Keaten, 572 P.3d 126 (CO 2025), the Supreme Court of Colorado (Supreme Court) considered whether the trial court properly imposed sanctions on the defendants for failing to preserve evidence before the commencement of litigation. The trial court noted that the defendants, who owned and managed an apartment building, began removing the evidence from an apartment after the plaintiffs complained of toxins originating from the apartment building. As a sanction, the trial court imposed a negative inference that the defendants’ destruction of evidence would have established a link in the chain of evidence against them. The court also awarded over $2.5 million in exemplary damages. The Supreme Court held that there is a duty to preserve relevant evidence when a party knows or should know that litigation is pending or is reasonably foreseeable. The Supreme Court provided clarification on this standard but did not find it necessary to remand the case because the trial court relied on available evidence to reach its findings on causation. The Keaten case involved personal injury claims by tenants of the defendants’ Section-8 housing complex related to toxic fume inhalation from unauthorized meth production inside an apartment unit below where they resided. In March 2018, the plaintiffs reported chemical smells to the property manager. The plaintiffs also told the property manager that they thought the fumes were coming from a meth lab in an apartment below their unit. About a week later, the property manager conducted a walk-through inspection of the apartment and did not find any signs of odor or foul play. In April 2018, the plaintiffs sent a letter to the defendants’ vice president detailing the various symptoms that they were experiencing due to exposure to the meth fumes from the apartment below. These symptoms included nose bleeds, burning sensations, heart palpitations, and difficulty in breathing. The Littleton Housing Authority inspected the plaintiffs’ apartment in April 2018 and confirmed a slight chemical smell. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams LLP
Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com

Reckless Disregard is. . . Well. . .Reckless

December 30, 2025 — Christopher G. Hill - Construction Law Musings
Punitive damages are hard to come by in construction law cases. This is because almost all construction contract cases are exactly that: contract cases. Between the economic loss rule and the Virginia Courts’ almost (though not completely) impregnable wall between tort and contract, punitive damages may seem completely out of the picture. Depending on your perspective and position on the construction project food chain, this fact can be either frustrating or comforting. However, like all seemingly immutable laws, this one has an exception according to the Chesapeake County, Virginia Circuit Court. In Sawyer v. C.L. Pincus Jr. & Co. et. al. this Virginia court was faced with the following scenario. The defendants, a church and its contractor, were sued by Sawyer over a construction swale that was built partly on Sawyer’s property. According to the plaintiff, the only permission they gave to their neighbors at the church was to allow the church to build a drainage berm that did not encroach on their property. As stated above, the church and its contractor built a swale that encroached on the Sawyers’ property. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

Moving in Before Substantial Completion? The Risks of Early Owner Occupancy

March 24, 2026 — Sydney Koby - ConsensusDocs
Introduction On many construction projects, particularly large projects facing schedule pressure, owners may begin occupying or using portions of the project before the work reaches substantial completion. This is often due to operational needs, phased turnover, or market demands that drive owners to take possession of all or part of a project while construction activities are ongoing. While early occupancy may seem practical, it can blur the lines of responsibility between owner and contractor and can create significant legal and practical complications. These disputes are especially common on large, complex projects where punch list work, system commissioning, and closeout activities overlap with owner use. Without clear documentation and carefully drafted contract provisions, early occupancy can undermine an owner’s ability to enforce completion requirements while simultaneously exposing the contractor to claims of delay, inefficiency, or interference. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Sydney Koby, Jones Walker
Ms. Koby may be contacted at skoby@joneswalker.com

Benchmark Litigation Recognizes Multiple Snell & Wilmer Offices and Attorneys in 2026 Rankings

December 02, 2025 — Snell & Wilmer
PHOENIX - Snell & Wilmer is pleased to announce that Benchmark Litigation, a publication that focuses exclusively on dispute resolution and litigation, has once again recognized multiple Snell & Wilmer offices, as well as eleven of the firm’s attorneys, in its annual U.S. edition rankings issue. Benchmark Litigation is the only publication on the market to focus exclusively on litigation work. Benchmark compiles its results from a culmination of a six-month research period where researchers conduct extensive interviews with litigators and their clients to identify the leading litigators and firms. During these interviews, researchers examine recent casework handled by law firms and ask individual litigators to offer their professional opinions on peers. Firms cannot pay to be recommended for the guide. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Snell & Wilmer

Insurer Granted Summary Judgment, in Part, After Partial Payment of Claim

February 10, 2026 — Tred R. Eyerly - Insurance Law Hawaii
The insurer was awarded summary judgment, in part, after paying a portion of the insured’s claim for hurricane damage. Taylor v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 231406 (S.D. Ala. Nov. 24, 2025). The Taylors’ home was damaged by Hurricane Sally. They submitted a claim under their homeowners’ policy to State Farm. They reported trees collapsing onto the house and blocking the front door, broken windows and doors, water damage and the roof collapsing in certain rooms of the house. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

Kahana Feld Secures Discontinuance with Prejudice in Fraudulent Case

January 06, 2026 — Kahana Feld
Kahana Feld secured a victory for its client after uncovering evidence that the plaintiff’s alleged trip-and-fall claim was fraudulent. The plaintiff sought $8 million in damages and claimed serious spinal and knee injuries stemming from an incident outside a Bronx retail store. Through strategic investigation and a crucial non-party deposition, our team established that the plaintiff’s identified eyewitness was out of the country at the time of the alleged accident—contradicting the plaintiff’s testimony and confirming the falsity of the claim. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Kahana Feld

ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES