ATTORNEY BIO
header image
880 Montclair Road Suite 100 Birmingham, AL 35213
Assistant
Angela Arrington
Legal Assistant
bio image R. Scott Connally
associate

Scott practices in LGWM's Architect and Engineers Practice Group. Scott's practice consists of defending architects, engineers and design builders in commercial and residential construction disputes throughout the Southeast United States. Scott also defends environmental tort claims on behalf of engineers, general contractors, chemical corporations and other entities involved in the manufacture or distribution of hazardous materials.

Professional Profile
Prior to joining Lloyd, Gray, Whitehead & Monroe, P.C., Scott served as a Judicial Law Clerk in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama for U.S. District Judges L. Scott Coogler in Tuscaloosa, Alabama (2012-2013), Abdul K. Kallon in Birmingham, Alabama (2013-2014), and C. Lynwood Smith in Huntsville, Alabama (2014-2015).
Admitted
  • All Alabama State Courts
  • United States District Courts for the Northern District of Alabama
Education
The University of Alabama School of Law, J.D., 2012 summa cum laude
The University of Alabama, M.S., Civil Engineering, 2009
The University of Alabama, B.S., Civil Engineering, 2008
CASES OF NOTE
  • Defended a prime contractor in a large, municipal construction project involving an injury to another contractor’s employee. The case was successfully resolved after we demonstrated the employee’s injuries were the result of a chronic respiratory condition that pre-existed the alleged incident.
  • Defended a geotechnical engineer whose alleged defective subsurface exploration led to a wastewater lagoon draining into the Tennessee River. We successfully argued the exploration met the industry standard of care and the damages sought were subject to an enforceable limit of liability.
  • Defended an engineer in claims arising from the conversion of an apartment building to a condominium. The Condominium Owner’s Association alleged the engineer failed to identify multiple defects that affected the remaining useful life of various building components. We successfully argued the alleged defects were outside the scope of the inspection or were the result of normal wear and tear that occurred after the inspection.
  • Defended an engineer in claims arising from the design of a storm shelter. The contractor sought indemnification from the engineer, alleging the engineer’s design was defective. We successfully argued the design was adequate per the engineer’s contract with the owner and the applicable building and safety codes, and no indemnification was owed to the contractor.
  • Defended an engineer in claims arising from the design of a stormwater management system in a subdivision. Property owners in the subdivision alleged the engineer’s design was defective because the pipes in the drainage system were too small causing water to back up onto their property. We successfully argued the engineer’s design met all applicable subdivision regulations, and the drainage issues were a construction problem.
  • Defended an international consulting firm in a case involving environmental due diligence services performed by firm. The due diligence services involved an assessment of all permits required under state or federal law. The EPA and ADEM argued the owner required additional permits related to wastewater discharges. We argued all required permits had been obtained and the facility’s production of wastewater did not require additional permitting. We negotiated a reasonable resolution of the claim.
  • Defended an industrial facility in its dealings with TDEC and the EPA in regards to alleged violations of its Operating Permit. We successfully resolved the case by establishing no emission exceedances had occurred and any exceedances of the operating parameters were de minimis in nature.
  • Defended an asset management company in claims arising from the services performed in the listing and sale of beachfront property. Potential purchasers alleged the asset management company failed to select their bid despite it being the highest bid to purchase the property. We successfully argued the asset management company owed no duty to potential purchasers and had the potential purchasers’ claims dismissed at summary judgment.
NEWSLETTER
VISIT US