Complex Business Litigation and Complex Construction Litigation will be governed by Part IV, Chapter XI of the New Jersey Rules of Court. The rules were established by the New Jersey Supreme Court. The new rules were adopted on July 27, 2018 and are now effective as of September 1, 2018.
For decades, we have represented professionals in the construction industry, including architects, engineers, land surveyors, and professional planners. We also represent construction managers, general contractors, and subcontractors.With the constant expanding need for specialization in the construction industry, our firm has developed it's construction practice to meet the specific needs of our clients.
Whether the claim involves simple residential construction or a complex commercial project,we have successfully represented our clients in both the New Jersey state and federal court systems as well as before state administrative and regulatory boards. We are frequent participants in non-binding construction mediation and in several formal construction arbitration forums in order to achieve the best possible results for our clients. Our efforts have culminated in several reported opinions creating the law and setting the bar in New Jersey.
While we enjoy a successful resolution to any claim, we firmly believe that the best defense is often avoiding litigation altogether. To that end, we promote and counsel our clients in risk management and litigation avoidance. We serve as general counsel to many design and construction firms assisting in contract preparation, pre-claim assistance, partnership and business formation, and professional business succession.
In keeping pace with the industry, we are active members of the Construction Law Section of the New Jersey State Bar Association and the New Jersey Chapter of the United States Green Building Counsel (USGBC-NJ). Partner Lawrence Powers serves as counsel to the New Jersey chapters of the American Institute of Architects (AIA-New Jersey) and the American Society of Landscape Architects (NJ-ASLA), as well as the New Jersey Society of Professional Engineers (NJSPE). We regularly lecture at construction trade seminars and are frequent contributors to construction trade publications. Our dedication to the construction industry further enables our attorneys to meet the ever-changing legal environment in order to represent our clients in any aspect of the industry.
To view our Construction Law Practice Group brochure, please click on the link for a PDF.
Related Blog posts
Legal writing is one of the most discussed topics in the practice of law, yet there are additional tools available for effective advocacy that the average attorney may be unaware. Attorney Mark Bonavitacola shares tips for brief drafting, local briefing requirements and the best way to showcase your knowledge and defend your client.
New Jersey joins a number of States in banning attorneys’ participation in Avvo’s programs which require attorneys to pay “marketing fees.” In this blog, Joseph V. Leone and Samantha R. Catanese examine the Joint Opinion issued by New Jersey Supreme Court prohibiting New Jersey attorneys from participating in the Avvo client-linking legal service.
Roof warranties often protect owners from issues encountered during warranty periods. In this blog, attorney Peter K. Oliver divulges three, need to know contract clauses to look for when replacing your roof, and offers an insightful look at Tesla's solar roof warranties, a product that is set to enter the market June 2017. If your roof fails to cover you, you should know what your roof warranty covers.
The Economic Loss Doctrine (ELD) can bar negligence claims in construction matters, but what about Fraud?
Ted Hubert IV explains where ELD is applied and why, but also addresses where ELD’s stand when it comes to fraud claims which are fairly common in construction and other commercial litigation settings.
According to the New Jersey Rules of Professional Conduct, “a lawyer shall keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information.” RPC 1.4(b). Not only is regular communication with the client mandatory, but it is also just good practice.
Oh v. Kang was an unpublished decision of our Appellate Division issued on March 12, 2015. The matter before the Court seemed relatively straightforward – whether the trial Court’s dismissal of the dental malpractice complaint was appropriate under the Affidavit of Merit Statute N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-27.