Rockwood & Noziska

Top legal talent for client centered representation

At Rockwood & Noziska LLP clients have a personal relationship with the attorneys working on their case. Our attorneys are dedicated and responsive to the specific needs of the clients they serve. The ability of our attorneys to persevere and obtain favorable results is founded upon our commitment to the legal profession and persistence in all situations. We also pride ourselves in using the latest technology available in presenting our cases. While we take each case by preparing for trial from day one, we believe that a good settlement is better than a great trial verdict. However, it must be a good settlement. The way that we obtain favorable settlements is that we are fully prepared to go to trial if needed.

We have a proven record of obtaining results for our clients that demonstrates our abilities inside and outside of the courtroom. Since forming in 2001, Rockwood and Noziska LLP has achieved settlements and verdicts totaling more than $110,000,000. Please get to know us better.


Neal H. Rockwood
Neal H. Rockwood Partner (619) 224-7778

Neal H. Rockwood emphasizes his practice in litigation for plaintiffs with a focus in construction defect, insurance coverage and insurance bad faith. Born in Medford, Massachusetts, Mr. Rockwood attended high school in northern California, after which he lived in Africa for a year and a…

C. Brant Noziska
C. Brant Noziska Partner (619) 224-7778

C. Brant Noziska graduated from Colorado College in 1975. He attended University of San Diego School of Law, receiving academic scholarships, graduating Magna Cum Laude in 1982. Included among his academic and scholarship awards is the 1982 recipient of the General George…

Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith Litigation

Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith LitigationNeal Rockwood and Brant Noziska together have a combined 64 years of experience in evaluating insurance coverage and litigating against insurance companies on behalf of policyholders. Their cases have included representation of homeowners and businesses for property damage, representing injured motorists against their automobile insurance carriers for uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage where the opposing party has insufficient coverage for the accident, and bad faith litigation of disability policies.

We have also represented various businesses and homeowners in situations where they have been sued but their insurance companies have refused to defend or indemnify them, or both. In fact, the firm’s largest jury award arose out of just such a scenario where an insurance company unreasonably and fraudulently refused to defend and indemnify one of our clients resulting in a $28.7 million dollar jury verdict.

In addition, since our firm represents homeowners and homeowner associations in construction defect cases we have found that understanding the amount of insurance available in any of those cases to be a very integral part of our representation in maximizing awards. Thus, we believe it to be very important to be able to evaluate insurance coverage issues the developer or contractor may have during the course of the case to help facilitate resolution.

Generally speaking, an insurance carrier and their insured have a legal relationship whereby the insurance carrier owes a duty of good faith and fair dealing to their insured policyholders. This duty is implied by operation of law into every insurance contract. Bad faith occurs when an insurance company unreasonably withholds coverage or a defense from its insured. Moreover, under California law, an insurance company cannot withhold coverage without thoroughly investigating a claim and providing an explanation for the reason for their denial. When insurance companies violate the law in this capacity they can be found liable in both tort and contract.

Our commitment to the legal profession is founded on persistence and preparation. We prepare each case from the outset as if it were going to trial. This places our clients in a far better negotiating position for settlement purposes in addition to being prepared to take the case to trial should settlement negotiations fail.

Construction Defect, Landslide, and Soil Subsidence Including Public Entity Liability

“If a builder build a house for someone, and does not construct it properly, and the house which he built fall in and kill its owner, then that builder shall be put to death.” Hammurabi’s Code of Laws translated by L.W. King.

Our laws are no longer as harsh as those developed by the King of Babylonia the 1700s B.C.E., however, the dangerous effects of construction defects still remain in our modern society.

When Neal Rockwood and Brant Noziska graduated from law school in 1982, California was in a decades old new home construction boom. All of the land that was easy and cheap to build had long since been developed. Land developers and builders were constructing on the highest risk remaining property available. That land needed to be cut, filled, and graded against the adverse effects of landslides and slope failure. Generally included in soils subsidence liability are landslides and other slope stability issues, soil subsidence, differential fill settlement, expansive soils, corrosive soils, high groundwater conditions and other subsurface groundwater conditions, foundations design, retaining wall litigation, standard of care for grading and soils compaction.

As a result of the efforts of many, including Brant and Neal, the standard of care as it pertained to grading subdivisions and foundation design changed to where today new homes are rarely affected by soil movement problems whether from inadequate compactions, differential settlements, expansive soils, or landslides. Having the efforts of many improving the standard of care as to the foundations upon which homes were built, attention broadened into the building envelope. Litigation addressed the ability of homes to resist water intrusion while also being appropriately designed and constructed as seismic and lateral load issues. Neal and Brant quickly became known for being able to handle large complex construction defect cases involving hundreds or thousands of units such as Palm Valley and PGA West and high rise projects such as Harbor Club Homeowners Association. Their expertise spans the gamut from soils and foundation design to rooftop and all parts in between. In an area of law known for lawyers who are quick to seek settlement, they have gained a reputation to take each case to trial if necessary to obtain a good result for their clients.

Neal and Brant have handled litigation from San Diego to Ventura, including Orange, Riverside, and Los Angeles Counties. Interestingly, during one investigation of a landslide in Ventura, our experts located and confirmed a fault previously suspected to exist and mapped its location as part of the Ventura Anticline.

Law Web Design by lfs-logo