Carson Iowa Construction Expert Witness Directory

Ball Janik LLP Welcomes Construction Defect Associate Miguel Bonnelly as Orlando Office Continues to Grow

December 15, 2025 — Ball Janik LLP
ORLANDO, FL – Ball Janik LLP is pleased to welcome Associate Miguel Bonnelly to the firm’s Construction Defect Practice Group in the Orlando office. Bonnelly brings experience from a leading nationwide personal injury law firm, where he represented homeowners and homeowners’ associations (HOAs) and businesses in complex construction matters. From construction defect matters to drafting Chapter 558 notices and conducting hearings, inspections, depositions, mediations, and settlements, Bonnelly is savvy in providing effective solutions for clients’ needs. “We’re pleased to welcome Miguel to the firm,” said James C. Prichard, Managing Partner of Ball Janik LLP. “His experience representing homeowners in complex construction matters is a perfect match for our firm, and we are eager for his thoughtful, results-driven counsel that will make a difference for our clients.” Bonnelly is fluent in both English and Spanish, creating greater accessibility for firm clients. He received his law degree from the University of Florida Levin College of Law and his bachelor’s degree from the University of Central Florida in legal studies, where he had the highest overall GPA. While in law school, he served as a legal intern at a boutique law firm with a focus on real property disputes, estate administration, and breach of contract claims, and at Community Legal Services of Mid Florida, providing civil aid in the housing unit throughout central Florida. “I’m excited to be joining a firm with such talented professionals and resources that make a profound difference for clients,” said Bonnelly. “The firm’s focus on collaboration and track record for excellence and results make this an ideal opportunity for the next chapter of my legal career.” About Ball Janik LLP Ball Janik LLP is a Florida-based law firm offering construction defect, construction law, insurance recovery, and commercial litigation counsel to its local and national clients. The firm was founded in 1982 and has expanded its capabilities, professionals, and geographic footprint. What started as a small firm focused on real property, land use, and litigation (known then as Ball Janik & Novack) has grown to a team of 50-plus attorneys and paralegals in 5 offices in Florida, with centuries of combined experience and capabilities. The firm has been recognized by Chambers USA, U.S. News & World Report and Best Lawyers®, The Best Lawyers in America©, and Corporate International. Read more here: https://www.balljanik.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

Don’t Ignore Prejudgment Interest

February 02, 2026 — David Adelstein - Florida Construction Legal Updates
When it comes to contracts, there may be a clause that provides that untimely payments shall bear interest at a particular rate. Or it may be the statutory rate. That clause will come into play when determining prejudgment interest. In ANY dispute, prejudgment interest can be an important damages component that accrues from the date of the loss. Don’t ignore prejudgment interest. The Fourth District of Florida, in a construction dispute, maintained:

“[I]f a plaintiff establishes that he sustained out-of-pocket loss, prejudgment interest must be awarded from the date of the loss. The trial court has no discretion regarding awarding prejudgment interest and must do so applying the statutory rate of interest in effect at the time the interest accrues.”

Bensusan v. Design Engineering Group, LLC, 2025 WL 3466367 (Fla. 4th DCA 2025) (citation omitted).

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

Construction of $3B Data Center in North Dakota Spurs Annexation Battle

January 13, 2026 — Annemarie Mannion - Engineering News-Record
Construction of a $3-billion data center on a 320-acre site in southeastern North Dakota has sparked an annexation dispute between the small city where it is being built and its much larger neighbor, Fargo. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Annemarie Mannion, Engineering News-Record
Ms. Mannion may be contacted at manniona@enr.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...

Shane Singh Named One of Los Angeles Business Journal's 'Top 100 Lawyers of Los Angeles' for 2026

April 27, 2026 — Lewis Brisbois
Sacramento Partner Shane Singh has been named one of the Los Angeles Business Journal's "Top 100 Lawyers of Los Angeles" for 2026. The LABJ’s annual list honors Los Angeles' top lawyers for their achievements within the city's business community. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

That’s a Wrap! Pennsylvania Court Holds Arbitration Clause in Online Agreement Unenforceable

May 14, 2026 — Gus Sara - The Subrogation Strategist
In Duffy v. Tatum, 2026 Pa. Super. LEXIS 112, 2026 PA Super 41, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania (Superior Court) considered whether an arbitration provision contained in the online Terms of Service on the defendant’s website were enforceable. The plaintiff, Daniel Duffy (Duffy), visited the website of defendant, Dolly, Inc. (Dolly), to purchase moving services. Duffy selected the number of movers, items to be moved and the type of vehicle needed. To complete the booking, the website required Duffy to checkmark a box labeled “By checking this box I accept the Dolly Terms of Service.” Duffy did not have to open the link or scroll to the bottom of the agreement before being able to click on the checkmark box. The Terms of Service included an arbitration provision requiring that any dispute related to the moving services to be resolved by arbitration in accordance with the American Arbitration Association. The Terms of Service did not include any statement that the user was waiving the right to a jury trial. The Superior Court found the internet Terms of Service unenforceable. During the moving process, an accident occurred and injured Duffy. In May 2024, Duffy and his wife sued Dolly and other related entities alleging negligence and loss of consortium. Dolly filed preliminary objections alleging that the parties agreed to alternative dispute resolution. The lower court overruled the preliminary objections, finding that Dolly’s website did not provide reasonably obvious notice of its Terms of Service to Duffy and, as such, Duffy never agreed to waive his constructional right to a jury trial. Dolly filed an appeal to the Superior Court. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams LLP
Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com

US Energy Dept. Withdraws Federal ‘Zero-Emissions Building’ Definition

December 22, 2025 — Bryan Gottlieb - Engineering News-Record
The U.S. Dept. of Energy has withdrawn the Biden-era federal definition of a “zero-emissions building,” marking another step in the Trump administration’s rollback of climate-focused initiatives and creating uncertainty for states, cities and owners that had informally used the guidance in project planning. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Bryan Gottlieb, Engineering News-Record
Mr. Gottlieb may be contacted at gottliebb@enr.com

CARSON IOWA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES