ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

Course of Conduct Can Serve as Waiver or Modification of Parties’ Contract

December 22, 2025 — David Adelstein - Florida Construction Legal Updates
When you enter into a contract, the language in the contract means something. And if you don’t follow what the contract says, it will be used against you. It can be used to support the argument that you breached the contract. Or it can be used to demonstrate your lack of compliance with the contract does not entitle you to the recourse you are seeking. However, this does not mean under certain circumstances the language of the contract cannot be waived or modified by the parties’ course of conduct. In a recent dispute, an owner and contractor sued each other under a cost-plus contract. The contractor recorded a construction lien and moved to foreclose its construction lien. The owner claimed it was over-charged and claimed the contractor breached the contract. The contractor also claimed it was not timely paid with improperly withheld payment applications. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the contractor, which was affirmed on appeal based on the parties’ course of dealing:

The trial court concluded that, although the parties’ cost-plus contract required that all change orders be approved in writing, the summary judgment record established that this provision was routinely waived by the parties’ course of dealing: [owner] would orally request changes to the project; [contractor] would perform those changes; and [owner] would pay the invoices for those changes.

Moscato Corp. v. Mutchnik Construction Group, Inc., 411 So.3d 570 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)

Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

---

Florida Litigation Team Delivers Crushing Summary Judgment Victory for National Home Builder

December 08, 2025 — Wood Smith Henning & Berman
The Wood Smith Henning & Berman Orlando trial team recently delivered a significant victory for a national home builder, obtaining three separate summary judgment rulings that resulted in a complete dismissal of all claims in a premises liability action in which the plaintiff demanded a seven-figure settlement. Partner Ian Gillan and Senior Associate Brian Hartley filed targeted motions for summary judgment addressing (1) trespassing; (2) Florida Building Code issues, and (3) OSHA applicability. The court granted all three motions. The case involved allegations that the plaintiff sustained injuries on a residential construction site. Plaintiff asserted that alleged violations of the Florida Building Code and OSHA regulations established a standard of care that was breached. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Wood Smith Henning & Berman

---

Texas Restricts Foreign Ownership of Real Property

November 09, 2025 — Anna Luczkow - Lewis Brisbois Newsroom
Houston, Tex. (October 9, 2025) - Effective September 1, 2025, certain foreign individuals and entities are no longer able to purchase or acquire an interest in real property in Texas. Governor Abott signed Senate Bill 17 into law on June 20, 2025, amending Chapter 5 of the Texas Property Code to add Subchapter H. The new legislation targets governmental entities of and companies, organizations, and individuals from “designated countries,” which Subchapter H defines as countries that the U.S. Director of National Intelligence identifies as posing a risk to United States national security, or additional countries that the governor designates after determining that the purchase or acquisition poses a risk to national security. Subchapter H initially designates China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea as posing such risk. “Companies” and “organizations” collectively include not only associations, corporations, partnerships, and limited liability companies, but real estate investment trusts, joint ventures, insurance companies, and non-profit organizations. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Anna Luczkow, Lewis Brisbois
Ms. Luczkow may be contacted at Anna.Luczkow@lewisbrisbois.com

---

New Legislation Requires Changes to your California Home Improvement Contract for 2026

November 18, 2025 — William L. Porter - Porter Law Group
California Business and Professions Code 7159, first enacted in 2004, was intended as a consumer protection measure to protect homeowners hiring contractors for home improvement work. The legislation sought to meet this laudable goal by dictating the terms to be used in home improvement contracts. covering everything from mandatory contractual language, lists of documents to be included, legal warnings to be provided, dispute resolution procedures, dictating where to initial, where to sign and even font size. The legislation unfortunately made it impossible to provide a homeowner with anything more than a complex multi-page legal document which many homeowners viewed with suspicion. The unintended consequence is that those contractors who violate the law and use a short but simple one or two-page, but illegal contract end up obtaining work. Those who follow the law and use the multi-page legally mandated contract end up losing customers because the contract is long, complex and frightening. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, Porter Law Group
Mr. Porter may be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com

---

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

---

No Cross-Complaint Needed - Court of Appeal Clarifies Co-Defendants May Oppose Each Other’s Summary Judgment Motions Without a Cross-Complaint

October 27, 2025 — Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP
On September 29, 2025, the Second District Court of Appeal issued an opinion in Bean v. City of Thousand Oaks (B338497), holding that a co-defendant with an adverse interest can oppose a motion for summary judgment without having filed a cross-complaint against the moving party. Plaintiff Bonnie Bean tripped and fell on a raised section of sidewalk in front of a Ventura County residence. She sued both the City of Thousand Oaks and Gina Goode, the owner of an adjacent property, alleging that tree roots from Goode’s yard caused a sidewalk defect. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

---

Georgia HB 676: A Bill Property Owners and Contractors Should Watch

March 24, 2026 — Robert Lafayette - The Construction Seyt
Property owners, contractors, and others dealing with mechanics and materialmen’s liens in Georgia should keep an eye on HB 676, which is currently making its way through the Georgia General Assembly. The bill aims to curb misuse of the lien process and provide additional remedies to those challenging a frivolous lien filing. What HB 676 Would Do HB 676 would add a new Code section (O.C.G.A. § 44-14-366.6) to the mechanics and materialmen’s lien statutes. If a lien is filed “without substantial justification or that is not made in good faith or that is made with malice or a wrongful purpose,” this new Code section would impose a fine of $1,500 per lien on the lien claimant, in addition to any attorney’s fees or court costs incurred by the party challenging the lien. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Robert Lafayette, Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Mr. Lafayette may be contacted at rlafayette@seyfarth.com

---

The AI Knows Too Much: When Employees Feed Trade Secrets into Generative AI Tools

April 14, 2026 — Kazim A. Naqvi & John V. Mysliwiec - Sheppard
Every time an employee pastes proprietary source code, a customer list, or a confidential business strategy into ChatGPT, Claude, or Google Gemini, they may be quietly dismantling the legal protections that make those secrets worth protecting. Courts and regulators are only beginning to grapple with this problem, and right now, the burden of preventing it falls squarely on employers. The Legal Stakes Under the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act (“DTSA”) and the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“UTSA”) as adopted across most states, a trade secret plaintiff must show that the information at issue was subject to reasonable measures to maintain its secrecy. Courts have historically credited measures like confidentiality agreements, physical access controls, and employee training—but those safeguards were designed for a world of thumb drives and disgruntled employees. They were not built for a world where a well-meaning engineer can, in seconds, transmit an entire corpus of proprietary data to a third-party AI platform operating under terms of service that may permit the provider to use inputs for model training. Reprinted courtesy of Kazim A. Naqvi, Sheppard and John V. Mysliwiec, Sheppard Mr. Naqvi may be contacted at knaqvi@sheppard.com Mr. Mysliwiec may be contacted at jmysliwiec@sheppard.com Read the full story...

---