A boutique firm.
With a national practice.
The attorneys of Martin | Hild represent owners, contractors and design professionals in the construction industry — and only in the construction industry. We have litigated, arbitrated and tried disputes over schedule delay and acceleration, extra work, differing site conditions, payment, liens and bonds, and design and construction defects, from Corpus Christi to Chautauqua County.
We are trial lawyers. Our foremost concern is getting a client out of a dispute as early as is practically possible.
Ranked Metropolitan Tier 1 in Construction Law by Best Law Firms in both Florida and Colorado for 2026. Attorneys recognized by Best Lawyers, Super Lawyers and Martindale-Hubbell.
Representative matters
Fifty-one disputes the firm's attorneys have handled, by project type, location, amount in dispute and disposition. Filter the tabulation and the total re-tots beneath it.
Representative matters handled by the firm's attorneys, some at prior firms. Amounts stated are sums in dispute, not amounts recovered. Most figures are published by the firm as “in excess of” the amount shown, so the total is a floor. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome in any other matter.
| Project | Location | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Cable-stayed bridge | Corpus Christi, Texas | $400,000,000 | Settled |
| Commuter rail project | San Mateo, California | $160,000,000 | Settled |
| Water treatment plant | San Jose, California | $130,000,000 | Settled |
| Theme park | Orlando, Florida | $120,000,000 | Tried |
| MSE wall dispute | Dallas, Texas | $100,000,000 | Active |
| Commuter rail project | Denver, Colorado | $65,000,000 | Settled |
| Wastewater treatment plant | Baltimore, Maryland | $60,000,000 | Settled |
| Intermodal center | San Francisco, California | $50,000,000 | Settled |
| Onshore wind power | Chautauqua Cnty, New York | $50,000,000 | Active |
| Road and bridge project | Seattle, Washington | $50,000,000 | Active |
| Wastewater treatment plant | Irvine, California | $50,000,000 | Settled |
| Commuter rail project | Denver, Colorado | $40,000,000 | Settled |
| Road and bridge project | Belmont, New Jersey | $40,000,000 | Settled |
| Wastewater treatment plant | Baltimore, Maryland | $40,000,000 | Settled |
| Wastewater treatment plant | Laurel, Maryland | $40,000,000 | Settled |
| Theme park | Orlando, Florida | $35,000,000 | Settled |
| Wastewater treatment plant | New York, New York | $33,000,000 | Resolved |
| Road and bridge project | Ft. Lauderdale, Florida | $30,000,000 | Settled |
| Road and bridge project | Beaufort, South Carolina | $26,000,000 | Settled |
| Theme park | Orlando, Florida | $25,000,000 | Settled |
| Road and bridge project | Clarksville, Virginia | $24,000,000 | Tried |
| Road and bridge project | San Mateo, California | $20,000,000 | Settled |
| Temporary works | San Francisco, California | $18,000,000 | Settled |
| Commuter rail project | Denver, Colorado | $15,000,000 | Settled |
| Site improvement — drainage and pump stations | Long Beach, California | $15,000,000 | Settled |
| Theme park | Orlando, Florida | $14,000,000 | Settled |
| Onshore wind power | Broome County, New York | $13,000,000 | Active |
| Design professional malpractice | Orlando, Florida | $12,000,000 | Settled |
| Road and bridge project | Ft. Lauderdale, Florida | $12,000,000 | Settled |
| Light rail project | Dallas, Texas | $10,000,000 | Tried |
| Light rail project | San Diego, California | $10,000,000 | Tried |
| Wastewater treatment plant | Passaic, New Jersey | $10,000,000 | Settled |
| Light rail project | Burlington, New Jersey | $8,000,000 | Settled |
| Road and bridge project | Ft. Lauderdale, Florida | $8,000,000 | Tried |
| Commuter rail project | Denver, Colorado | $7,500,000 | Arbitrated |
| City street improvement | Miami Beach, Florida | $7,000,000 | Settled |
| Commuter rail project | Denver, Colorado | $7,000,000 | Settled |
| Combined sewer overflow facilities | Atlanta, Georgia | $6,000,000 | Settled |
| Hospital | St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands | $5,000,000 | Settled |
| Road and bridge project | Los Angeles, California | $5,000,000 | Settled |
| Road and bridge project | Greensboro, North Carolina | $5,000,000 | Settled |
| Wastewater treatment plant | Passaic, New Jersey | $5,000,000 | Settled |
| Government complex defects | St. Augustine, Florida | $4,000,000 | Summary Judgment |
| Cruise ship pier | St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands | $3,500,000 | Arbitrated |
| Road and bridge project | Scranton, Pennsylvania | $3,500,000 | Tried |
| Wastewater treatment plant | Seneca, Maryland | $1,500,000 | Tried |
| Admiralty project | San Francisco, California | $800,000 | Tried |
| Commuter rail project | Rockville, Maryland | TBD | Active |
| Road and bridge project | Farmington Bay, Utah | TBD | Active |
| Road and bridge project | Renton, Washington | TBD | Active |
| Road and bridge project | Dallas, Texas | TBD | Active |
No matters match that combination.
Showing 51 of 51 matters, in excess of
$1,793,800,000
Rows marked TBD carry no published figure and add nothing to the total.
Three offices. Fifteen states and territories.
The firm is based in Maitland, Denver and Irvine, and its attorneys have appeared in state and federal courts, in arbitration and in mediation across the country — California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Cable-stayed and MSE-wall bridge work, commuter and light rail, water and wastewater treatment, onshore wind, intermodal centers, theme parks, hospitals and admiralty.
| Jurisdiction | Matters | In dispute |
|---|---|---|
| Texas | 4 | $510,000,000 |
| California | 10 | $458,800,000 |
| Florida | 10 | $267,000,000 |
| Maryland | 5 | $141,500,000 |
| Colorado | 5 | $134,500,000 |
| New York | 3 | $96,000,000 |
| New Jersey | 4 | $63,000,000 |
| Washington | 2 | $50,000,000 |
| South Carolina | 1 | $26,000,000 |
| Virginia | 1 | $24,000,000 |
| U.S. Virgin Islands | 2 | $8,500,000 |
| Georgia | 1 | $6,000,000 |
| North Carolina | 1 | $5,000,000 |
| Pennsylvania | 1 | $3,500,000 |
| Utah | 1 | TBD |
Bars are scaled to the largest jurisdiction. Amounts are sums in dispute, not recoveries, and are a floor: most are published as “in excess of” the figure shown.
What we are brought in to do
The firm creatively uses expert witnesses, consultants and current technology to reach the most efficient and cost-effective resolution a case allows.
Delay, acceleration and lost productivity
Schedule analysis, time-impact and windows analysis, and the claims and defenses that follow from them.
Differing site conditions
Type I and Type II conditions, notice, and the geotechnical and design record behind them.
Extra work and change orders
Directed and constructive changes, cardinal change, and disputes over pricing and entitlement.
Construction and design defects
Defect claims for and against contractors, owners and design professionals, including patent and latent distinctions.
Payment, liens and prompt payment
Contract payment disputes, construction and mechanics' liens, pay-if-paid and pay-when-paid provisions.
Payment and performance bonds
Surety claims, defaults, takeover agreements and Miller Act and little Miller Act practice.
Bid protests
Protests and responses on public procurements, and the administrative record that decides them.
Design professional liability
Professional negligence claims involving architects and engineers, and the statutory limitations that apply.
Contract preparation and review
Drafting and negotiating prime, subcontract and teaming agreements, indemnity and duty-to-defend provisions.
Mediation, arbitration and neutral evaluation
Advocacy in ADR, and service as a neutral.
The firm
Four partners, nine attorneys and three paralegals across three offices.
Gregory S. MartinManaging Partner
Frank J. HildPartner
Rhyddid WatkinsPartner
Paul A. BennettPartner
Afton J. ParisAttorney
Benjamin BurlesonAttorney
Katrina L. MarinoAttorney
Joseph T. ZavoralAttorney
Sarafina RamalhoAttorney
Kyle W. WoodfordAttorney
Sam RhotonAttorney
Thomas D. TyraAttorney
Ryan S. White-BoydAttorney
Lisa DancelParalegal
Quinn MartinParalegal
Dane VoldmanParalegal
Writing
Articles and firm newsletters on the questions clients ask most often.
- Navigating COVID-19 for the construction industryKeeping essential work moving, and the contractual consequences of not.
- Thou shall not work without a proper licenseA roadmap for the good guys. The statutes do not weigh intent. PDF
- Teaming agreements: traps, pitfalls and other entanglementsA casual date with no strings, or married without knowing it.
- You win — but you still loseThe duty to defend, and how you may already have agreed to it.
- Can an email serve as written notice?Electronic signatures are enforceable. That is not the end of the question.
- Proving a delay claim, and defending against themWhat the schedule has to show before anyone is paid for time.
The full archive — sixteen articles and the newsletter back issues
Start a conversation
Call the office nearest the project, or email info@martinhild.com. If you already have a claim file, the document upload portal takes it directly.
-
Florida
555 Winderley Place, Suite 415
Maitland, FL 32751F 407.660.4540
-
Colorado
4643 South Ulster Street, Suite 970
Denver, CO 80237 -
California
6 Cushing Drive, Suite 201
Irvine, CA 92618