I agree that you're very marketable with 9 years of experience, and although the substantive experience may be construction defects, your skills are very transferrable -- even though you didn't go to trial often, you are probably well-versed in pre-trial motions, negotiation skills, case development, bringing in business, working with experts, etc.
In addition to losing $100k/year in salary (minus expenses of working), you are also losing out on your future salary, and whatever premium you would be making if you had more years on the job. Sheryl Sandburg discusses this in Lean In -- a great book that might help you think about this decision from a different perspective.
That said, as a mom to a 3 year old, my ideal work situation (if I could afford it) would be to work part-time. Being home with baby is challenging! It's nice to go to work, be able to use the bathroom whenever you want, and use the non-mom part of your brain. If you are looking to make a substantive change in your legal career, finding a practice that will take a chance on you as a part-time associate is a great way to learn, although I wouldn't expect that a 0.5 FTE salary would be half of what you made at the firm. Although, if you're collecting unemployment it's hard to justify going to work part time to make the same amount you're making in unemployment. I would let that run out before going back to work ;)