• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building expert witness Ashburn Virginia custom homes expert witness Ashburn Virginia landscaping construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia condominiums expert witness Ashburn Virginia institutional building expert witness Ashburn Virginia Medical building expert witness Ashburn Virginia housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia casino resort expert witness Ashburn Virginia townhome construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia tract home expert witness Ashburn Virginia structural steel construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia Subterranean parking expert witness Ashburn Virginia parking structure expert witness Ashburn Virginia production housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia mid-rise construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia retail construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia multi family housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia industrial building expert witness Ashburn Virginia custom home expert witness Ashburn Virginia low-income housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia concrete tilt-up expert witness Ashburn Virginia condominium expert witness Ashburn Virginia
    Ashburn Virginia consulting engineersAshburn Virginia engineering expert witnessAshburn Virginia eifs expert witnessAshburn Virginia architecture expert witnessAshburn Virginia construction expert witnessAshburn Virginia construction claims expert witnessAshburn Virginia testifying construction expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Ashburn, Virginia

    Virginia Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: (HB558; H 150; §55-70.1) Warranty extension applicable to single-family but not HOAs: in addition to any other express or implied warranties; It requires registered or certified mail notice to "vendor" stating nature of claim; reasonable time not to exceed six months to "cure the defect".

    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Ashburn Virginia

    A contractor's license is required for all trades. Separate boards license plumbing, electrical, HVAC, gas fitting, and asbestos trades.

    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Northern Virginia Building Industry Association
    Local # 4840
    3901 Centerview Dr Suite E
    Chantilly, VA 20151

    Ashburn Virginia Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    The Top of Virginia Builders Association
    Local # 4883
    1182 Martinsburg Pike
    Winchester, VA 22603

    Ashburn Virginia Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Shenandoah Valley Builders Association
    Local # 4848
    PO Box 1286
    Harrisonburg, VA 22803

    Ashburn Virginia Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Piedmont Virginia Building Industry Association
    Local # 4890
    PO Box 897
    Culpeper, VA 22701

    Ashburn Virginia Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Fredericksburg Area Builders Association
    Local # 4830
    3006 Lafayette Blvd
    Fredericksburg, VA 22408

    Ashburn Virginia Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Augusta Home Builders Association Inc
    Local # 4804
    PO Box 36
    Waynesboro, VA 22980

    Ashburn Virginia Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Blue Ridge Home Builders Association
    Local # 4809
    PO Box 7743
    Charlottesville, VA 22906

    Ashburn Virginia Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Ashburn Virginia

    Construction Firms Complain of Missed Payments on Redevelopment Project

    Defective Concrete Blocks Spell Problems for Donegal Homeowners

    Crane Dangles and So Do Insurance Questions

    Montreal Bridge Builders Sue Canada Over New Restrictions

    Three's a Trend: Second, Fourth and Ninth Circuits Uphold Broad "Related Claims" Language

    Rio Olympics Work Was a Mess and Then Something Curious Happened

    Travelers’ 3rd Circ. Win Curbs Insurers’ Asbestos Exposure

    Arbitration—No Opportunity for Appeal

    DoD Testing New Roofing System that Saves Energy and Water

    The Hidden Dangers of Construction Defect Litigation

    Under the Hood of U.S. Construction Spending Is Revised Data

    Houston Home Sales Fall for the First Time in Six Months

    Reminder: The Devil is in the Mechanic’s Lien Details

    Scary Movie: Theatre Developer Axed By Court of Appeal In Prevailing Wage Determination Challenge

    Torrey Pines Court Receives Funding for Renovation

    Million-Dollar U.S. Housing Loans Surge to Record Level

    Showdown Over Landmark Housing Law Looms at U.S. Supreme Court

    S&P 500 Little Changed on Home Sales Amid Quarterly Rally

    Construction Defects Are Not An Occurrence Under New York, New Jersey Law

    Housing Advocacy Group Moved to Dissolve New Jersey's Council on Affordable Housing

    How Helsinki Airport Uses BIM to Create the Best Customer Experience


    Federal Court Finds Occurrence for Faulty Workmanship Under Virginia Law

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Collapse Coverage Fails

    Partners Patti Santelle and Gale White honored by as "Top Women in Law" The Legal Intelligencer

    Changing Course Midstream Did Not Work in River Dredging Project

    Contractors and Force Majeure: Contractual Protection from Hurricanes and Severe Weather

    New Home for the Aged Suffers Construction Defects

    Brookfield Wins Disputed Bid to Manage Manhattan Marina

    Purely “Compensatory” Debts Owed by Attorneys to Clients (Which Are Not Disciplinary or Punitive Fees Imposed by the State Bar) Are Dischargeable In Bankruptcy

    Quick Note: Insurer Must Comply with Florida’s Claims Administration Act

    2016 California Construction Law Upate

    Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage for Inverse Condemnation Action

    Lack of Flood Insurance for New York’s Poorest Residents

    Massachusetts High Court to Decide if Insurers Can Recoup Defense Costs

    A Contractual Liability Exclusion Doesn't Preclude Insurer's Duty to Indemnify

    The General Assembly Seems Ready to Provide Some Consistency in Mechanic’s Lien Waiver

    Pollution Exclusion Prevents Coverage for Injury Caused by Insulation

    Manhattan to Add Most Office Space Since ’90 Over 3 Years

    Pending Sales of Existing Homes in U.S. Decline for Eighth Month

    Denver Parking Garage Roof Collapses Crushing Vehicles

    Guardrail Maker Defrauded U.S. of $175 Million and Created Hazard, Jury Says

    EPA Rejects Most of N.Y.’s $511 Million Tappan Zee Loan

    An Oregon School District Files Suit Against Robinson Construction Co.

    Maryland Contractor Documents its Illegal Deal and Pays $2.15 Million to Settle Fraud Claims

    Melissa Pang Elected Vice President of APABA-PA Board of Directors

    Blackstone Said to Sell Boston Buildings for $2.1 Billion

    “Good Faith” May Not Be Good Enough: California Supreme Court to Decide When General Contractors Can Withhold Retention

    Homebuilders See Record Bearish Bets on Shaky Recovery

    BHA has a Nice Swing: Firm Supports Wounded Warrior Project at WCC Seminar
    Corporate Profile


    The Ashburn, Virginia Construction Expert Witness Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 5,500 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Ashburn's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, as well as a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Ashburn, Virginia

    Five-Year Statute of Limitations on Performance-Type Surety Bonds

    December 01, 2017 —
    The statute of limitations on a claim against a performance-type bond is 5 years from the breach of the bond, i.e., the bond-principal’s default (based on the same statute of limitations that governs written contracts / obligations). See Fla. Stat. s. 95.11(2)(b). This 5-year statute of limitations is NOT extended and does NOT commence when the surety denies the claim. It commences upon the default of the bond-principal, which would be the act constituting the breach of the bond. This does not mean that the statute of limitations starts when a latent defect is discovered. This is not the case. In dealing with a completed project, the five-year statute of limitations would run when the obligee (beneficiary of the bond) accepted the work. See Federal Insurance Co. v. Southwest Florida Retirement Center, Inc., 707 So.2d 1119, 1121-22 (Fla. 1998). This 5-year statute of limitations on performance-type surety bonds has recently been explained by the Second District in Lexicon Ins. Co. v. City of Cape Coral, Florida, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D2521a (Fla. 2d DCA 2017), a case where a developer planned on developing a single-family subdivision. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at

    Ninth Circuit Upholds Corps’ Issuance of CWA Section 404 Permit for Newhall Ranch Project Near Santa Clarita, CA

    April 11, 2018 —
    On April 9, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in a unanimous opinion, rejected the challenges to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ (Corps) decision to issue a Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 permit to the Newhall Land and Farming Company (Newhall), which is planning a large residential and commercial project in Los Angeles County near Santa Clarita, CA (the Newhall Ranch project). The Newhall Ranch project, which involves the discharge of dredge and fill materials into the Santa Clara River, has been scaled back and modified, and the Ninth Circuit held that it is consistent with the CWA, the Corps’ regulations and procedures, as well as the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Endangered Species Act (ESA). The Ninth Circuit provides an excellent primer on the Section 404 permitting process. The case is Friends of the Santa Clara River v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at

    Ohio Court of Appeals: Absolution Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage for Workplace Coal-Tar Pitch Exposure Claims

    January 10, 2018 —

    On December 28, 2017, the Ohio Court of Appeals (Eighth District) held in GrafTech International, Ltd., et al. v. Pacific Employers Ins. Co., et al., No. 105258 that coverage for alleged injurious exposures to coal tar pitch was barred by a liability insurance policy’s absolute pollution exclusion. Applying Ohio law, the court concluded that Pacific Employers had no duty to defend GrafTech or pay defense costs in connection with claims by dozens of workers at Alcoa smelting plants that they were exposed to hazardous substances in GrafTech products supplied to Alcoa as early as 1942.

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    Account for the Imposition of Material Tariffs in your Construction Contract

    March 28, 2018 —
    After Hurricane Irma, I wrote an article that contractors should revisit the force majeure provisions in their construction contracts. Not later. But Now. The force majeure provision is an important provision in a construction contract to account for certain uncertainties that you have NO control over. Recently, another reason has given rise to contractors needing to revisit their force majeure provisions, as well as any provisions dealing with material escalations. Not later. But now. The imposition of raw steel and aluminum tariffs (tax on imported goods) and the back-and-forth regarding a potential trade war leads to the kind of uncertainty that should be assessed as a risk. A risk in both time and cost from material escalations. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at

    Property Insurance Exclusion for Constant or Repeated Leakage of Water

    March 14, 2018 —
    A property insurance policy, no different than any insurance policy, contains exclusions for events that are NOT covered under the terms of the policy. One such common exclusion in a property insurance policy is an exclusion for damages caused by "constant or repeated seepage or leakage of water…over a period of 14 or more days." The application of this exclusion was discussed in the recent opinion of Hicks v. American Integrity Ins. Co. of Florida, 43 Fla. L. Weekly D446a (Fla. 5th DCA 2018). In this case, while the insured was out of town, the water line to his refrigerator started to leak. When the insured return home over a month later, the supply line was discharging almost a thousand gallons of water per day. The insured submitted a property insurance claim. The property insurer engaged a consultant that opined (likely, correctly) that the water line had been leaking for at least five weeks. Based on the above-mentioned exclusion, i.e., that water had been constantly leaking for over a period of 14 days, the insurer denied coverage. This denial led to the inevitable coverage dispute. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at

    Owner Bankruptcy: What’s a Contractor to Do?

    February 28, 2018 —
    Bankruptcy of the owner or developer of a real estate construction project can be very unsettling to contractors. But a declaration of bankruptcy by the developer, in and of itself, does not constitute a breach of contract such that the contractor can stop working. Contract provisions providing that the contract is terminated if a party becomes insolvent or files for bankruptcy are generally unenforceable. Partially-performed construction contracts are executory contracts, meaning that the obligations of the parties to the contract have not yet been fully performed. The Bankruptcy Code allows a bankruptcy trustee (in a Chapter 7 dissolution case) or the debtor-in-possession (in a Chapter 11 reorganization case) either to assume or to reject an executory contract. A debtor-in-possession has until the time of the confirmation of its plan of reorganization to decide if it will assume or reject the contract. The contractor may ask the bankruptcy court to require the debtor-in-possession to make a decision on the contract sooner, but the court will most likely give the debtor-in-possession a fair amount of time to make the decision. Reprinted courtesy of Troy R. Covington and Stephen M. Parham, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Mr. Covington may be contacted at Mr. Parham may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Misread of Other Insurance Clause Becomes Costly for Insurer

    February 22, 2018 —

    One insurer's refusal to defend based upon its "other insurance" provision ultimately meant the insurer had to pay all of the insured's defense costs. Steadfast Ins. Co. v. Greenwich Ins. Co., 2018 Wis. App. LEXIS 51 (Wis. Ct. App. Jan. 17, 2018).

    Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) was a government agency that provided water reclamation and flood management services to the city. From March 1, 1998 to February 20, 2008, MMSD contracted with United Water Services Milwaukee LLC to operate the sewerage system. From March 1, 2008 on, MMSD contracted with Veolia Water North America-Central, LLC to operate the system.

    Through agreements, both companies were obligated to indemnify MMSD for claims arising out of the operations and maintenance of the system and to obtain insurance to cover their indemnity obligations. Both companies complied.

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at

    When Does a Contractor Legally Abandon a Construction Project?

    January 24, 2018 —
    Lately, we’ve been spending more time as litigators pursuing and defending claims of abandonment against contractors. It has become apparent that abandonment is often misinterpreted in its legal meaning and effect. Here are some thoughts on abandonment to consider. On its face, the concept of abandonment is simple enough. For any number of reasons, a contractor abandons a project when the contractor stops showing up. Abandonment is major concern for all players on the project because it causes critical path delays and significant costs to replace the contractor with another contractor, many times at a much higher cost than the original contractors’ bid. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Rick Erickson - Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Erickson may be contacted at