Construction Litigation

Construction disputes have ramifications that extend in many directions and usually cause more than a mere hiccup in the completion of a project. Extended litigation can result in losses of time, capital and resources that can spell the failure of a new real estate initiative.

The experienced construction litigators of Troutman Sanders advise owners, developers, investors, lenders and others that envision and fund construction projects; the architects, builders, general contractors, subcontractors, suppliers and vendors that turn these dreams into physical reality; and the landlords and tenants that make use of these important assets. Our long-standing litigation clients include one of the top five hotel chains in the world, one of the world’s largest EPC contractors, and the largest utility in the United States, to name a few. The caliber of our clients allows us the privilege of resolving disputes related to highly significant and complicated construction projects.

We believe that dispute prevention is an effective strategy under almost every circumstance, and work with clients to identify and resolve potential conflicts before they erupt into courtroom battles. When our efforts at negotiation or settlement are rebuffed by opposing parties, we deploy our experienced litigators at trial, in appeals, and in alternative dispute resolution both nationally and internationally.

We have a unique record of success in extremely complex, high-stakes construction litigation involving unique factual or legal issues, but we represent our clients’ interests with equal skill in every forum, and direct our full attention to pursuing our clients’ interests no matter the size or scope of the claim. Due to consistent results, our construction team has been ranked for five years as a Tier 1 national construction litigation practice by U.S. News–Best Lawyers, and our litigators are individually recognized by several prestigious organizations, including Chambers USA and the American College of Construction Lawyers.

We represent clients in the full range of construction disputes, including the following:

  • Delay, disruption and scheduling disputes
  • Design and construction defects
  • Government contracting disputes, including issues related to P3 projects, the Miller Act, and the Little Miller Act
  • Mechanics lien and fee disputes
  • Scope and extra work claims
  • Terminations
  • Compliance disputes involving federal, state and local laws and regulations

We have successfully represented clients in cases involving commercial, manufacturing, residential and mixed-use developments, office buildings, utility and energy-generation plants, educational buildings, theme parks, government buildings, and hospitals and medical centers. Adding to this broad-based experience, we regularly draw on the skills of experienced attorneys in Troutman Sanders’ corporate, environmental, finance, real estate and other areas of law to ensure coordinated solutions and high-quality client service. We also partner regularly with Troutman Sanders eMerge to efficiently and effectively manage all aspects of discovery and document management, from collection through to trial.

  • We represent the largest public utility in the southeast in litigation concerning delays and extra cost claims arising out of the construction of Plant Vogtle, the first new nuclear power generating units to be built in the U.S. in 30 years.
  • In a precedent setting case, our client, a French contractor, defeated the English Government and its House of Commons in an English court, after we successfully argued that, under the new community law, a member government could not discriminate against a private company from another member nation. Our client recovered all potential lost profits and all attorneys’ fees.
  • In a widely-reported, industry-wide, class-action, price-fixing case on behalf of the nation’s largest contractors, we won a landmark decision, including the recovery of $500 million dollars, in the United States District Court, later affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals.
More + Less -