Construction Litigation

Print PDF
Insights & Events
Expand All

Briggs and Morgan has extensive experience in litigating construction disputes. All of our construction attorneys are trained litigators. Because we focus on keeping construction disputes out of court, our attorneys are experienced in alternative forms of dispute resolution including arbitration, mediation, med/arb, summary jury trials and special masters.

Our client base is extensive, ranging from individuals to multinational corporations and includes commercial enterprises, nonprofit educational and charitable institutions, utilities, governments, and public bodies. We represent many banks and other financial institutions, as well as insurance and surety companies, electric and gas utilities, trade and professional associations, and architects and engineers.

Briggs attorneys advise clients in the various methods of dispute resolution, giving them the opportunity to decide how they may want a dispute to be resolved should one arise on a project. If discovery is a requirement to the dispute method selected, we will work with clients to prepare them for depositions and assist in responding to interrogatories.

We have arbitrated and mediated numerous types of disputes including asbestos abatement, bid protests, bond claims, bridges, changes or changed conditions, construction management; defaults, delays, disruption and acceleration claims; design and specification liability; design-build and fast-track; dirt work; disaster and collapse; environmental claims; government procurement; hazardous waste; heavy and highway; insurance; joint ventures; locks and dams; mechanics' liens; public contracting; sewers; surety claims and liability; termination; tort and product liability; utilities; waste to energy; wastewater treatment.

Briggs and Morgan construction attorneys have experience in claims and litigation at the federal, state, and local levels and are licensed to practice in various state and federal courts, including the Federal District Court of Claims. Our experience includes appeals under the federal Contract Disputes Act (CDA) and the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR).

Though we work to avoid litigation for our clients, our attorneys have experience in litigating the following disputes: Federal/state/local contracting, procurement, bidding, and contract administration claims; private construction contract documents, bidding, and contract administration claims, subcontract/supplier relations, construction insurance/bonds, payment and performance bonds, builder risk, and general liability; mechanics' liens; and architects and engineers malpractice.

Representative Matters

  • Regularly represent national home builder/developer in mass party construction defect litigation.
  • Regularly represent national home builder/developer on additional insured coverage matters.
  • Represented builder client in action commenced by homeowners association (HOA). Matter was confidentially resolved in client's favor at fourth mediation session one month before scheduled three-week jury trial.
  • Represented general contractor defending against claim of improper backcharges.
  • Represented homeowner defending against breach of contract and promissory estoppel by construction contractor. Obtained summary judgment in client's favor.
  • Represented homeowners in construction defect action against contractor in arbitration and obtained judgment for all damages sought.
  • Represented owner in construction defect litigation involving the construction of new corporate headquarters; Obtained injunctive relief against contractor's effort to arbitrate claims and settled case favorably.
  • Represented power generation entity regarding the design and construction projects using various project delivery systems including EPC, design, supply, furnish and install.
  • Represented subcontractor seeking payment in Miller Act Action.
  • Representing general contractor in dispute with subcontractor regarding subcontractor's breach of contract, fraud and failure to comply with Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry prevailing wage requirements.
  • Successfully defended an engineering firm against a multi-million dollar negligence claim asserted by a city following a slope failure at an MSW landfill.
  • Successfully defended an engineering firm against professional negligence claims arising out of the design and construction of a cell phone antenna at the top of a water tank.