One of the more famous examples
A single design change resulted in 118 people dying
A Brief History of: The Hyatt Regency Walkway Collapse (Short Documentary)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=La_VBtjhUHU
That one is a classic, and it resulted in major changes to the way architects and engineers review and [don't] "approve" shop drawings. Before the Hyatt Regency collapse, our shop drawing stamps had options for "Approved," "Approved as Noted," "Revise and Resubmit," and either ""Not Approved" or "Rejected."
After Hyatt Regency, the liability insurers demanded that the language be changed so that architects and engineers not "approve" shop drawings. The new language is along the lines of "Reviewed - No Exceptions Taken," "Reviewed - Construction May Proceed as Noted," "Revise and Resubmit," and "Not Accepted." There is now also a block of verbiage (which doesn't mean anything as a result of the Hyatt Regency decision, but the insurers demand it anyway) that says something like "Our review is limited to general conformance with the design concept ..." and a bunch of other weasel words intended to create some distance between the architect/engineer and whoever it is that generates the shop drawings.
It may seem like a minor change but, in the legal arena where the word "Approve" carries great significance, this was a sea change in professional liability.
I could write a book on why and how what seemed like a minor departure from the original design became such a major issue, but it has already been written up in detail in a number of publications. This was another case where who was the engineer of record became a crucial point. In the Hyatt Regency case, the engineers who designed it had a design for the hanger rods that supported the catwalks. The steel company that was hired to fabricate the hanger rods changed the design to make it easier to fabricate the rods. The design engineers "approved" the shop drawings, without noticing the significance of the change.
In court, the engineer of record argued that the fabricator had changed their design, so they shouldn't be liable. The court disagreed. The court ruled that, as the engineer of record, it was their responsibility to ensure that the completed project was safe. By reviewing and "approving" the shop drawings, they took ownership of the change. This was the major wake-up call for architects and engineers -- if you are the architect/engineer of record, YOU OWN IT. Up to then, reviews of shop drawings were often limited to a quick scan. If it more or less looked like what the firm had designed, it was "approved." All of a sudden, architects and engineers found that they had to actually look at the shop drawings, and understand them.
That incident changed the way architects and engineers ran their practices permanently.