Construction Litigation



Construction disputes, whether the result of defects, delays or other inevitable challenges that can impact even the most successful job site, slow down projects and can deeply impact a company’s bottom line. Combine that with economic factors that can severely test businesses in the industry, and you have a recipe for risk.

In order to avoid any obstacles from investors, regulators and all potential litigants, construction industry leaders need smart legal counsel who shoot straight and take a practical approach to resolving disputes quickly.

Our Construction Litigation Practice sweeps the spectrum in our representation of industry players, from building product manufacturers to the contractors who build homes, workplaces and hotels across the Southeast. We are honored to help them effectively respond to potential litigation, find the financial tools necessary for project development, initiate action against another party, and/or navigate federal, state and local regulations.

Our innovative strategies, vast resources, industry leadership and diverse experience mirror the strengths and diversity of our clients, allowing us to provide customized support and results for our clients from all sides. With extensive knowledge in construction litigation, we lead our clients with the high-caliber service of a national law firm and flex our skills in local zoning, planning and inspection practices to cover both legal and business strategy.


  • Defended a client and its bonding company, in matters brought by a subcontractor and the South Carolina Department of Transportation (SCDOT), related to alleged delays in the demolition and replacement of a bridge.
  • Directed the closing of two loans totaling more than $30 million for a major wholesale distributor of building materials and construction products.
  • Served as national coordinating and trial counsel for a leading building product manufacturer in numerous class actions of national and regional scope involving a type of exterior wall cladding known as exterior insulation and finish systems (EIFS). Through more than a decade of litigation in numerous state and federal courts across the country, we guided our client and its insurers to a successful conclusion of the litigation with low impact on the continued growth and prosperity of the client’s business.
  • Served for more than 20 years as South Carolina defense counsel for a national building product manufacturer in class action litigation of nationwide scope in which colleges and universities and other governmental and institutional building owners sued for damages caused by the installation of asbestos-containing materials in their buildings.  These cases, filed in South Carolina, were among the first product liability class action cases to be filed anywhere and set a precedent for future cases.
  • Counseled a federal credit union through a commercial loan for the construction of a $7.5 million classroom building project for a university foundation.
  • Represented a construction firm that was unable to collect from the owner for costs it incurred due to change orders and other problems beyond its control while installing HVAC equipment for renovation. The owner contended that our client, as a subcontractor, could not directly pursue the claim, so our team made a presentation to the South Carolina Procurement Review Panel. This approach resulted in a favorable ruling that led to the settlement the claim on the eve of trial, with the owner paying for most of the claims.
  • Received a defense verdict on indemnity and contribution claims brought against our client by a general contractor in a case that was brought to trial. The client had faced liability for up to $2.3 million related to the Daniel's Landing project.
  • Successfully represented a fire door manufacturer in a closely watched lawsuit involving the deaths of nine City of Charleston firefighters at a Sofa Super Store. We were able to show that the alleged failure of the doors were not the result of design and manufacturing problems and did not contribute to the deaths.

18 Attorneys

DRI Members