Daniel A. Ikeri


Daniel A. Ikeri is an attorney with 18 years of experience in complex construction litigation, insurance coverage (litigation, coverage opinions, declaratory relief, and bad faith), catastrophic injury and brain damage, personal automobile, business, toxic tort, commercial and residential premises liability, and general civil litigation. Mr. Ikeri also has extensive experience in writ of mandamus, breach of construction contracts, and civil rights litigation.

Mr. Ikeri practiced for several years defending general contractors and subcontractors in complex construction litigation including failure to disclose, claims for damage caused by improper soil compaction, subsidence, landslide, roof leaks, window leaks and water intrusion, mold damage and injuries, improper flat work, landscape, and buried screeds. He has successfully litigated actions involving personal automobile, toxic tort, commercial and residential premises liability, product liability/warranty actions, and civil rights. Mr. Ikeri has also successfully resolved hundreds of prisoner-civil rights actions and has extensive experience in both plaintiff and defense representation in serious accident and injury litigation. He has successfully mediated or arbitrated more than 400 civil cases.

Mr. Ikeri was admitted to the State Bar of California in 2000 and the United States District Court, Southern District (2000), Eastern District (2010), and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal (2010). Mr. Ikeri obtained his bachelor’s degree in political science from the University of Lagos in 1986 (cum laude), and University of Lagos School of Law in 1991 where he was the editor of the law review.

Mr. Ikeri is married with two young children. He loves to play soccer, work out at the gym, read, and travel.

3 Significant Cases Handled During My Time At Kennedy & Souza

Lewin v. Halper Construction, et al.
Plaintiffs were the owners of a remodeled two-story home located in San Diego, California. The original home was built in 1943. On April 2005, Plaintiff’s entered into a construction contract with our client David Halper dba Dave Halper Construction to remodel and add another story to the then existing one-story home. Halper Construction hired subcontractors to perform and complete the remodel construction. The remodel of the was completed on June 6, 2006, and the notice of completion was recorded on June 14, 2006. There were several issues in this case but the most contentious was Plaintiff expert’s recommendation and cost for replacement of the floor tiles on the first floor which we argued had been paid for by the client’s insurance company in a previous claim arising from plumbing leak in the house. We took the lead in deposing Plaintiffs, subcontractors, and relevant third parties in this case. Our efforts led to a reduction in Plaintiff’s settlement demand which led to settlement of a very contentious case following three mediations and a mandatory settlement conference.

Lopez v. AHCDC 6 LP, et al.
Plaintiff is the owner of a property located in Los Angeles, California. There are two buildings on the property. The main building is a two-story building with several apartments. The building which was the subject of the litigation is a detached one bedroom and one-bathroom unit in the South (rear) of the property. The buildings on the property were constructed in 1946. Plaintiff alleged he purchased the property in 2003. The detached building was originally constructed to be a detached garage and later modified to be used as a living space. Plaintiff sued the general contractor and our client AHCDC 6 LP, the developer of an adjacent multi-unit housing development known as Knob Hill Apartment and alleged that because of the failure to provide lateral support to his property during the excavation of the Knob Hill Apartment development, his property had soil movement and settlement, soil failure and instability, damage to improvements and property, and surface and subsurface drainage problems. I took over handling of this matter in April 2017, and immediately prepared and served written discovery on Plaintiff, the general contractor and subcontractors. I also coordinated with counsel for the general contractor to take the deposition of Plaintiff. With the relevant information obtained and cooperation of other counsel, we scheduled a mediation with Ross Hart on December 15, 2017, and settled the matter.

Breakform v. Caswell, et al
This case arises from the construction of a 4-story 11-unit apartment building located in Los Angeles in California. The property owner hired our client as the designer-builder of the project. Approximately two years after the construction contract was executed, the project owner terminated our client and hired another general contractor. The subsequent general contractor was also terminated by the project owner. The project owner completed construction of the project with the help of a consultant. Most, if not all the subcontractors who worked on the project were hired by our client and continued working on the project until completion. The overlap of subcontractors along with the myriad of issues which includes affirmative claims by the two general contractors against the project owner and the project owner’s cross-action against the general contractors for construction defects, have created unique conditions which would require the skills of seasoned construction defect attorneys to untangle and resolve. My focus and calming influence has been largely helpful in moving this matter forward as we continue to position the case for mediation before incurring significant costs in discovery.