Jim Holland

A uniquely creative trial and appellate lawyer who thrives in both court and arbitration, Jim reshapes his clients’ most difficult legal challenges. Whether they have large, sophisticated legal departments or limited experience, clients trust Jim with their bet-the-business problems.

Jim’s considerable knowledge of complex litigation ensures creative resolution of clients’ most difficult problems. He is best known for his consistent victories in construction litigation, but he is also a top choice for disputes involving insurance, lender liability, intra-company management, and real estate. Because of his unique ability to analyze complex legal issues, Jim is often enlisted to reshape strategies mid-case when clients face mounting risks. His fresh ideas and sophisticated analysis change the course of the litigation, creating wins for cases destined for defeat.

• Persuaded the Arizona Supreme Court to reject all prior decisions across the nation regarding the statute of limitation for a subcontractor’s veil-piercing claim. The published decision affirming his summary-judgment win is Specialty Companies v. Meritage Homes, 248 Ariz. 434.
• Defended pharmacists and pharmaceutical companies in opioid litigation. The plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their claims in Arizona after the defense team persuaded the Arizona Supreme Court to address several novel issues of law regarding the claims.
• Persuaded the Arizona Supreme Court to reverse prior unfavorable precedent and obtained summary judgment for client regarding the anti-deficiency statute’s applicability to construction loans. The published opinion is BMO Harris Bank, N.A. v. Wildwood Creek Ranch, LLC, 236 Ariz. 363.
• Recovered more than $10 million through litigation for a corporate client after the company’s former executive diverted company money to purchase multimillion-dollar insurance policies prior to his death.
• Hired to represent a commercial-building owner after its prior counsel could not obtain a $500,000 settlement for construction defects. Reframed the issues and collected a $2 million settlement.
• Won a case that clarified subrogation and other legal doctrines for discharging liens, options, and other encumbrances. The published appellate opinion is Brimet II LLC v. Destiny Homes Marketing, 231 Ariz. 457.
• Employed a first-of-its-kind analysis and placed client’s development issue on a referendum ballot despite admitted defects in the petition. The published appellate decision is Forszt v. Stop Oro Valley Outrageous Giveaways, 212 Ariz. 263.
• Successfully litigated the expansive scope of arbitrators’ powers and helped client avoid court in a commercial construction dispute. The published appellate decision is Sun Valley Ranch 308 v. Robson, 231 Ariz. 287.
• Sued a structural engineer for defective designs affecting multiple homes in a development and obtained a judgment for the entire claim, including an award of all attorneys’ fees and costs and monetary sanctions against the design engineer.
• Represented a general contractor that faced multimillion-dollar liability for terminating a subcontractor from a military construction project. Obtained an arbitration award defeating all seven of the subcontractor’s claims (including wrongful termination, Miller Act, prompt-pay act, and various other claims), recovered the added expense of hiring a replacement subcontractor, and was awarded his attorney fees and costs.
• Retained to represent a victim’s family after it lost its wrongful-death claim against the Phoenix Police Department. Created a sophisticated indemnity theory to obtain a multimillion-dollar settlement.

Speaking Engagements

• “Winning Strategies for Construction-Defect Claims after Zambrano,” CLE, April 4, 2024.
• “A New Frontier: Enforcing Waivers of the Implied Warranty of Good Workmanship and Habitability,” CLE, Sept. 12, 2019.
• Testified to Arizona Legislative Committee regarding the Purchaser Dwelling Action statute, Nov. 14, 2018.
• “Update on Emerging Trends in Homeowner Defect Claims,” CLE, Nov. 13, 2018.