Construction litigation produces volumes of evidence that are meaningful to engineers and unintelligible to everyone else. Architectural drawings, structural calculations, geotechnical reports, daily logs, RFIs, change orders, inspection reports — the documentary record is deep, but it does not show what happened. It describes what happened in a language that assumes expertise the fact-finder does not have.
The visual challenge in construction cases is translation: converting technical documents into something a jury or arbitrator can evaluate without becoming a construction professional in the process.
Construction sequence animation shows what was built, in what order, and how it deviated from the plans and specifications. A phased 3D animation of the construction process — foundation, framing, envelope, systems — allows the fact-finder to see where the departure occurred. When the issue is improper sequencing, inadequate shoring, premature loading, or incorrect installation, showing the sequence makes the error visible.
Structural failure visualization shows how a failure propagated through a building or structure. A roof collapse, a retaining wall failure, a foundation settlement, a facade detachment — these events have causes that exist in three dimensions and unfold over time. An animated reconstruction that shows the load path, the point of failure, and the progressive damage helps the fact-finder understand why the building failed, not just that it failed.
Building code and standard comparison visualizes what the code required versus what was built. Side-by-side presentations showing the applicable code provision alongside the as-built condition — with measurements, annotations, and highlighted deviations — turn an abstract code violation into a visible fact.
Schedule and delay analysis is critical in delay claim and construction defect cases. Gantt-style timelines showing planned versus actual progress, critical path impacts, concurrent delays, and responsibility allocation transform schedule disputes from battles of expert opinion into visual comparisons that the fact-finder can evaluate directly.
Site condition documentation uses 3D models built from LiDAR scans, drone surveys, and photogrammetry to capture and present site conditions. These models allow the fact-finder to see the site as it existed at relevant times — before construction, during construction, and after the defect manifested.
Detail and assembly visualization shows how specific building components were supposed to be constructed and how they were actually constructed. Window flashing details, waterproofing membrane installation, structural connections, mechanical system routing — these are the details where construction defect cases are often won or lost.
Construction sequence animations, structural failure reconstructions, building code comparison graphics, schedule and delay timeline visualizations, 3D site models from LiDAR and photogrammetry, detail and assembly comparison graphics, expert testimony support presentations, and document annotation and callout graphics.
Accident reconstruction, engineering failures, and mechanical analysis from evidence.
Evidence-based three-dimensional models of scenes, objects, and structures.
Strategy-driven exhibit and presentation packages built around your verdict architecture.
Numerical evidence transformed into clear, persuasive trial graphics.