Construction Litigation

Whether you own a small, local construction/design company or a multinational conglomerate, a business dispute or lawsuit can interfere with your business’ operations. For decades, business owners in Arizona and across the country have trusted our attorneys to effectively and efficiently represent them in a wide variety of construction related disputes. Our philosophy is to deliver legal services in the same manner in which you manage your construction projects – with clearly articulated objectives, a trusted strategic plan, a coordinated team approach and a practical budget.

We counsel clients and their insurers from project inception through project completion and, as necessary, during the litigation process. Perspective gained from partnering with many different professionals in the construction industry provides our team with unique insights and a better opportunity to understand disputes that may arise. Our goal is to work proactively with clients to avoid litigation altogether, but when unavoidable, we are skilled in the efficient resolution of litigated disputes.

Our litigation experience includes matters involving:

  • Defective workmanship
  • Design professional negligence
  • Construction defects
  • Product or equipment defects
  • Project site injuries
  • Property damage
  • Mechanics’ liens
  • Insurance and coverage issues
  • Suretyship

Dismissal achieved for Architectural Firm in Owner’s ADA violations lawsuit at large multi-family project designed by client. The trial judge granted motion to dismiss based on the economic loss rule and statute of repose. The Arizona Court of Appeals reversed the judge’s decision, but the Arizona Supreme Court reinstated the dismissal by published decision addressing construction law issues of first impression in Arizona. See Flagstaff Affordable Housing L.P. v. Design Alliance, Inc., 223 Ariz. 320, 223 P.3d 664 (2010)

Averted State of Arizona’s threatened lawsuit against Architectural Firm that designed university dorm project. Student injured leg when it went through dorm shower glass. State intended to sue client for indemnity from the personal injury damages, plus cost of replacing all shower glass in the dorm project. Wachholz identified provisions in client’s design contract to support argument that State’s claim was precluded, after which State ceased its pursuit of client. (2010)

Dismissal achieved for Subcontractor that designed and installed the metal exterior of the University of Phoenix football stadium. Subrogated Property Insurer brought a multi-million dollar federal district court lawsuit to recover the cost of repairing storm damage alleged to be the result of design and construction defects. The court granted motion to dismiss based on subrogation waivers in the prime contract and subcontract. (2012)

Dismissal achieved for Environmental Engineering Firm with EPA contract for pre-remediation investigation of a Superfund mine and smelter site. Drilling subcontractor filed a federal district court lawsuit after client terminated subcontract. Motion to dismiss granted for client based on plaintiff’s failure to comply with Arizona licensing requirements. (2014)

Dismissal achieved for Framing Subcontractor in Owner’s state court lawsuit alleging construction defects in luxury residence. The lawsuit asked for $350,000 to repair the alleged defects. Suit was dismissed on motion asserting that lack of privity precluded claim. (2013)

Favorable settlement achieved for General Contractor/Construction Manager of a 950-room hotel/resort project in a state court lawsuit brought by the Owner and multiple Subrogated Property Insurers against multiple defendants. The lawsuit sought $40 million in damages alleged to have been caused by 950 leaking guestroom showers and water penetrating exterior stucco system. A favorable settlement was reached at mediation after Wachholz obtained Judgment for client on subrogated carriers’ claims. Settlement contribution paid with respect to client was less than 1.5% of plaintiff’s alleged damages. (2014)

Favorable settlement achieved for Geotechnical Engineering Firm in Retail Owner’s federal district court lawsuit against multiple engineers and contractors. The suit asked for $20 million in damages resulting from failure of an MSE wall exceeding 65 feet in height. The matter settled favorably in mediation after the development of contractual and causation defenses. (2013)

Settlement for Architectural Firm in Owner’s federal district court lawsuit for over $20 million in delay damages during construction of City of Phoenix’s $600-million expansion of the Phoenix Convention Center. (2009)