On December 19, 2025, Governor Kathy Hochul signed Senate Bill S5655 further amending New York’s Prompt Payment Act to render void any provision in a private construction contract exceeding $150,000 that requires retainage of more than 5% of the contract sum.[1]

Eastern District of Pennsylvania Decision Highlights Critical Contract Drafting Issues

A recent federal court decision is an important reminder for construction industry professionals about the precise language needed to make mediation a mandatory step before litigation. On November 18, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania ruled in Healy Long & Jevin, Inc. v. CQSA Construction, LLC that a dispute resolution clause failed to create a binding condition precedent to litigation, despite the general contractor’s arguments to the contrary.

This article was originally published on December 15, 2025 on Law360 and is republished here with permission.

For years, arbitration users have sent a consistent message: They want faster, more predictable, and more cost-effective processes without sacrificing quality and fairness.

The American Arbitration Association–International Centre for Dispute Resolution’s announcement and rollout of an artificial intelligence arbitrator for two-party, documents-only construction disputes this September marks a meaningful response to that market demand.[1]

Introduction

On October 23, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court decided Yoder v. McCarthy Const. Inc.,[1] addressing statutory employer immunity in the context of a construction project under the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act.[2] The court’s decision reaffirmed longstanding precedent that general contractors may claim statutory employer immunity against tort claims initiated by a subcontractor employee, irrespective of whether they actually pay workers’ compensation benefits to an injured subcontractor employee.

A Practice Note outlining key procedural and strategic considerations for a party defending a construction arbitration. This Note addresses the crucial initial steps a respondent should take on receiving a demand for arbitration, including reviewing the arbitration agreement for potential jurisdictional challenges and assessing the procedural framework established by the relevant institutional rules, such as those of the American Arbitration Association (AAA), JAMS, the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), or the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR). It explores important tactical decisions, such as whether to file a detailed answering statement, assert counterclaims, or seek joinder of third parties or consolidation with other proceedings. This Note also provides guidance on developing defenses, managing pre-hearing procedures like disclosure and dispositive motions, and evaluating the use of expedited arbitration. It examines various hearing strategies designed to streamline proceedings and effectively present a defense, including the use of a chess clock, witness conferencing (hot tubbing), and different approaches to expert testimony.

The explosive growth of artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming U.S. data center construction, creating new opportunities and challenges across the construction, energy, and technology sectors. Demand for digital infrastructure is surging, requiring massive amounts of energy, larger facilities, and driving record-breaking competition amid resource constraints.[1]

Shutdown, again. This advisory helps contractors manage operations during this period.

First Step for Government Contractors and Companies Subject to US Export Controls.

Contractors should closely monitor their customer and regulatory agencies’ websites for shutdown guidance, as agencies like DoD, DOJ, and others have already issued instructions.[1] Each agency may have slightly different responses, so staying informed is crucial. Contractors should be particularly mindful of: (1) when contractors must halt work, (2) what work and costs are reimbursable during the shutdown, (3) cost-saving measures that comply with labor laws, and (4) the impact of future administrative delays on commercial operations.

The Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas deemed a design-build construction contract void for failure to comply with a provision of the Architects Licensure Law that requires a design-build contract to name the architectural firm responsible for architectural services.[1]