Anaheim California Roofing 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

Maryland Enacts Climate-Cost Study Over Veto, New Jersey Advances Climate Superfund Proposal as Earlier State Laws Face Ongoing Court Challenges

January 21, 2026 — Amanda G. Halter, Ashleigh Myers & Jillian Marullo - Gravel2Gavel Construction & Real Estate Law Blog
Maryland lawmakers have overridden the governor’s veto to enact legislation directing a statewide assessment of climate-related costs, while New Jersey lawmakers are preparing a January committee hearing for the State’s pending Climate Superfund Act. Together, these actions underscore continued state-level interest in both study-based and liability-focused climate-cost attribution frameworks, even as four separate lawsuits challenging state climate superfund statutes in New York and Vermont proceed in federal court. Maryland Legislature Overrides Veto to Advance Climate-Cost Assessment On December 16, the Maryland General Assembly voted to override Governor Wes Moore’s veto of S.B. 149 / H.B. 128, the “Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation – Total Assessed Cost of Greenhouse Gas Emissions – Study and Reports” Act. The vote followed the Governor’s announcement, just days earlier, that his administration would fully fund the study mandated by the bill, effectively reversing his prior veto. Reprinted courtesy of Amanda G. Halter, Pillsbury, Ashleigh Myers, Pillsbury and Jillian Marullo, Pillsbury Ms. Halter may be contacted at amanda.halter@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Myers may be contacted at ashleigh.myers@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Marullo may be contacted at jillian.marullo@pillsburylaw.com Read the full story...

Snell & Wilmer Receives Multiple National and Regional Top Tier Rankings in 2026 “Best Law Firms® Rankings” by Best Lawyers®

December 08, 2025 — Snell & Wilmer
PHOENIX – Snell & Wilmer is proud to announce it has once again been recognized by Best Law Firms®, earning 34 national and 199 regional rankings across 74 categories by Best Lawyers® in their annual Best Law Firms rankings. The firm received national Tier 1 rankings for its Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law, Commercial Litigation, Communications Law, Construction Law, Corporate Law, Litigation – Construction, Litigation – Labor and Employment, Litigation – Real Estate, Real Estate Law, and Securities Regulation categories. The firm also earned national rankings in 24 other categories, and 15 of its offices earned regional rankings. The 2026 Best Law Firms rankings are based on the highest number of participating firms and the highest number of client ballots on record. The rankings are determined through a rigorous evaluation process that includes the collection of client and lawyer evaluations, peer review from leading attorneys in their field, and review of additional information supporting a firm’s accomplishments. The following is the complete list of Snell & Wilmer practices ranked in the 2026 Best Law Firms: National Rankings Banking and Finance Law Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law Commercial Litigation Communications Law Construction Law Corporate Law Employment Law – Management Energy Law Environmental Law Financial Services Regulation Law Health Care Law Labor Law – Management Litigation – Banking and Finance Litigation – Bankruptcy Litigation – Construction Litigation – Environmental Litigation – Intellectual Property Litigation – Labor and Employment Litigation – Real Estate Litigation – Regulatory Enforcement (SEC, Telecom, Energy) Litigation – Securities Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions – Defendants Mergers and Acquisitions Law Mining Law Native American Law Natural Resources Law Patent Law Real Estate Law Securities / Capital Markets Law Securities Regulation Tax Law Trademark Law Trusts and Estates Venture Capital Law Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Snell & Wilmer

A Couple of Mechanic’s Lien Bills in VA [UPDATED]

February 23, 2026 — Christopher G. Hill - Construction Law Musings
Well, its that time of year again, the Virginia General Assembly is in session and looking to make changes to all kinds of things here in the Commonwealth. While most of those changes are well outside of the subject of Construction Law Musings, changes to the mechanic’s lien statutes certainly are not. This year, the Virginia General Assembly is poised to make some big changes if certain legislation gets out of committee and passes the legislature, a description and some comments on these follow: HB752 – Mechanics’ liens; liens attaching to property; memorandum of lien. [Original Description] Removes the exclusion of the attachment of a mechanic’s lien to property improved or repaired when the lien is based on a claim for repairs or existing structures. The bill further removes (i) the ability of a lien claimant to file any number of memoranda of lien including the details relating to the lien and (ii) the provisions of the Code specifying that no memorandum filed shall include sums due for (a) labor or materials furnished more than 150 days prior to the last day labor was performed or (b) material furnished to the job preceding the filing of such memorandum. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

A Permitting Base Checklist for Data Centers and Power Plants

June 02, 2026 — Michael S. McDonough, Stephen J. Humes & Stacey C. Wright - Gravel2Gavel Construction & Real Estate Law Blog
There is a lot of talk these days about “license to operate” for data centers, meaning management of the relationships with stakeholders and broader communities concerning both the benefits and adverse consequences of locating a facility in a particular locale. Here, we are speaking of “license to operate” more literally—namely, the legal and regulatory permitting and approval requirements for a privately owned data center whether by itself or colocated with a power generating plant. Our Base Checklist includes generally and potentially applicable permitting requirements for development and operation, using California as an example. (Taking legal authority Frank Sinatra out of context, “If you can make it there, you can make it anywhere.”) The actual requirements for a given facility would depend, in part, on local law, including planning and zoning laws and plans, and the environment of the site. Just as examples, additional permitting and mitigation requirements might apply if sensitive receptors are located nearby (e.g., noise mitigation for residential dwellings), if sensitive and protected biological resources (e.g., jurisdictional waters and/or protected species) would be impacted, or if the present or former land uses require additional measures (e.g., hazardous materials remediation, mitigation for conversion of prime farmland, or protection of cultural resources). The scope of permit requirements would ultimately be determined by the applicable regulatory agencies and by the lead and responsible agencies under the applicable state environmental land use regime—in our reference case here, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. McDonough, Pillsbury, Stephen J. Humes, Pillsbury and Stacey C. Wright, Pillsbury Mr. McDonough may be contacted at michael.mcdonough@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Humes may be contacted at stephen.humes@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Wright may be contacted at stephen.humes@pillsburylaw.com Read the full story...

Midwest Team Secures Resolution of Matter for Homeowners’ Association Client, Recovery of Attorneys’ Fees

February 10, 2026 — Lewis Brisbois Newsroom
Kansas City/Wichita Partner Alan L. Rupe and Kansas City Associate Delaney McCoy recently achieved a victory on behalf of their client, a homeowners’ association that was sued after denying a solar panel application. The plaintiff homeowners challenged the association’s decision in court, and after extensive—and costly—litigation, the court ultimately determined that the dispute was not yet ripe for judicial review. With that threshold issue resolved, the parties were able to work collaboratively to address the solar panel matter itself. But one significant question remained: whether the association was entitled to recover its legal fees under the declaration, despite the American Rule, which generally requires each party to bear its own costs. The client felt understandably taken advantage of because this issue could—and should—have been resolved without litigation. Considerable time and resources were diverted from the community for the advantage of a single household, so the Lewis Brisbois team continued to advocate for the association’s contractual right to recover fees. After oral argument, the Court agreed, enforcing the fee‑shifting provisions in the governing documents and ruling in favor of the homeowners’ association. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

Quick Note: Don’t Spoil Evidence!!!!

March 10, 2026 — David Adelstein - Florida Construction Legal Updates
The phrase “spoliation of evidence” is a phrase that gets used, sometimes properly and sometimes improperly. The reason is that if evidence is legitimately spoiled, the opposing party wants an adverse inference jury instruction. There are two potential adverse inference jury instructions dealing with spoliation of evidence, neither of which are good, and one of which you definitely don’t want. A recent case discusses these jury instructions (check here) in a slip and fall personal injury case. The bottom line is that you need to preserve evidence relevant to a claim. Don’t lose it. Don’t intentionally destroy it. Don’t pretend it does not exist. Don’t do all the things that hinder the preservation and ultimate production of the relevant evidence. An adverse inference jury instruction (or an adverse inference implication in a non-jury trial) could be much, much worse. The facts are what the facts are. The best thing you can do is confront the facts. Confront the bad facts just like the good facts. The nature of any dispute is that there will be both good and bad facts. Bad facts can hopefully be explained recognizing there will be bad facts on the other side too. Sometimes, the bad facts warrant major strategic considerations and shifting the focus of how a dispute will be handled and presented. Whatever you do, don’t put yourself in a position where you are spoiling evidence. Once you get an adverse inference instruction, that’s it, as it’s very tough to overcome. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

Thank You for Year 19 of Legal Elite

January 05, 2026 — Christopher G. Hill - Construction Law Musings
Thank you once again to those in the Virginia legal community who elected me to the Virginia Business Legal Elite in the Construction Law category for the 19th consecutive year. The 19 consecutive years of election to the Legal Elite in the Construction Category span my over 15 years as a solo construction attorney. The fact that you all have continued to elect “100%” of the lawyers at The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill, PC for the last 15 years is most gratifying and only confirms that my decision to “go solo” over 15 years ago was a good one. To be included in this list of top construction attorneys is both humbling and gratifying. For the complete list of the Virginia construction lawyers who were elected along with me, see the 2025 Virginia Business Legal Elite in Construction Law. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill, PC
Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA ROOFING EXPERT WITNESS DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES