BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building expert witness Cottonwood Alabama townhome construction expert witness Cottonwood Alabama custom home expert witness Cottonwood Alabama production housing expert witness Cottonwood Alabama structural steel construction expert witness Cottonwood Alabama mid-rise construction expert witness Cottonwood Alabama casino resort expert witness Cottonwood Alabama Subterranean parking expert witness Cottonwood Alabama custom homes expert witness Cottonwood Alabama housing expert witness Cottonwood Alabama concrete tilt-up expert witness Cottonwood Alabama low-income housing expert witness Cottonwood Alabama office building expert witness Cottonwood Alabama hospital construction expert witness Cottonwood Alabama industrial building expert witness Cottonwood Alabama condominiums expert witness Cottonwood Alabama high-rise construction expert witness Cottonwood Alabama condominium expert witness Cottonwood Alabama landscaping construction expert witness Cottonwood Alabama multi family housing expert witness Cottonwood Alabama tract home expert witness Cottonwood Alabama parking structure expert witness Cottonwood Alabama
    Cottonwood Alabama architect expert witnessCottonwood Alabama construction project management expert witnessesCottonwood Alabama engineering expert witnessCottonwood Alabama hospital construction expert witnessCottonwood Alabama construction expert witness public projectsCottonwood Alabama construction project management expert witnessCottonwood Alabama eifs expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Cottonwood, Alabama

    Alabama Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Although there is case law precedent for right to repair, Title 6 Article 13A states action must be commenced within 2 years after cause and not more than 13 years after completion of construction.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Cottonwood Alabama

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Home Builders Association of Dothan & Wiregrass Area
    Local # 0132
    PO Box 9791
    Dothan, AL 36304
    Cottonwood Alabama Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Enterprise Home Builders Association
    Local # 0133
    PO Box 310861
    Enterprise, AL 36331
    Cottonwood Alabama Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Metro Mobile Inc
    Local # 0156
    1613 University Blvd S
    Mobile, AL 36609

    Cottonwood Alabama Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Baldwin County Home Builders Association
    Local # 0184
    916 PLantation Blvd
    Fairhope, AL 36532

    Cottonwood Alabama Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    South Alabama Home Builders Association
    Local # 0102
    PO Box 190
    Greenville, AL 36037
    Cottonwood Alabama Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Alabama
    Local # 0100
    PO Box 241305
    Montgomery, AL 36124

    Cottonwood Alabama Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Greater Montgomery Home Builders Association
    Local # 0164
    6336 Woodmere Blvd
    Montgomery, AL 36117

    Cottonwood Alabama Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Cottonwood Alabama


    Construction Contract Clauses That May or May Not Have Your Vote – Part 3

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Despite Construction Defects

    Construction Defect Dispute Governed by Contract Disputes Act not yet Suited to being a "Suit"

    Practical Advice: Indemnification and Additional Insured Issues Revisited

    St Louis County Approves Settlement in Wrongful Death Suit

    Mass. Gas Leak Follows NTSB Final Report, Call for Reforms

    Former Owner Not Liable for Defects Discovered After Sale

    When is a Contract not a Contract?

    Determining Duty to Defend in Wisconsin Does Not Include Extrinsic Evidence

    Ambiguity Kills in Construction Contracting

    Jury Instruction That Fails to Utilize Concurrent Cause for Property Loss is Erroneous

    Landlord Duties of Repair and Covenant of Quiet Enjoyment

    Survey: Workers Lack Awareness of Potentially Hazardous Nanomaterials

    Coverage, Bad Faith Upheld In Construction Defect Case

    Reporting Requirements for Architects under California Business and Professions Code Section 5588

    SB800 CONFIRMED AS EXCLUSIVE REMEDY FOR CONSTRUCTION DEFECT CLAIMS

    No Third-Quarter Gain for Construction

    White House’s New Draft Guidance Limiting NEPA Review of Greenhouse Gas Impacts Is Not So New or Limiting

    Dispute Over Exhaustion of Primary Policy

    Louisiana Couple Claims Hurricane Revealed Construction Defects

    Look Out! Texas Building Shedding Marble Panels

    Continuous Injury Trigger Applied to Property Loss

    Power of Workers Compensation Immunity on Construction Project

    Detroit Craftsmen Sift House Rubble in Quest for Treasured Wood

    Carolinas Storm Damage Tally Impeded by Lingering Floods

    Deck Collapse Raises Questions about Building Defects

    Case Remanded for Application of Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    LEEDigation: A Different Take

    A Recap of the Supreme Court’s 2019 Summer Slate

    Mountain States Super Lawyers 2019 Recognizes 21 Nevada Snell & Wilmer Attorneys

    Housing Starts in U.S. Beat 1 Million Pace for Second Month

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Increased 4.3% in November

    New Proposed Regulations Expand CFIUS Jurisdiction Regarding Real Estate

    Insurance Client Alert: Mere Mailing of Policy and Renewals Into California is Not Sufficient Basis for Jurisdiction Over Bad Faith Lawsuit

    Environmental Roundup – April 2019

    Construction Defect Lawsuits Hinted for Dublin, California

    Save A Legal Fee? Sometimes You Better Talk With Your Construction Attorney

    Construction May Begin with Documents, but It Shouldn’t End That Way

    How Berlin’s Futuristic Airport Became a $6 Billion Embarrassment

    Colorado Court of Appeals holds that insurance companies owe duty of prompt and effective communication to claimants and repair subcontractors

    Court Confirms No Duty to Reimburse for Prophylactic Repairs Prior to Actual Collapse

    Toronto Contractor Bondfield Wins Court Protection as Project Woes Mount

    Seeking Better Peer Reviews After the FIU Bridge Collapse

    Federal Court Finds Occurrence for Faulty Workmanship Under Virginia Law

    A General Contractors Guide to Bond Thresholds by State

    Floating Crane on Job in NYC's East River Has a Storied Past of Cold War Intrigue

    Hospital Inspection to Include Check for Construction Defects

    Cameron Pledges to Double Starter Homes to Boost Supply

    New Member Added to Seattle Law Firm Williams Kastner

    HP Unveils Cheaper, 3-D Printing System to Spur Sales
    Corporate Profile

    COTTONWOOD ALABAMA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Cottonwood, Alabama Construction Expert Witness Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 7,000 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Drawing from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Cottonwood'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
    Cottonwood, Alabama

    A Few Things You Might Consider Doing Instead of Binging on Netflix

    April 13, 2020 —
    Governments throughout the world have issued “shelter in place” orders requiring that residents stay at home except for “essential” purposes. As a result, in the United States, more than a third of Americans have been ordered to stay at home. This, in turn, has had a direct impact on construction projects which have slowed or have been temporarily shuttered altogether, and it will (not may) have an impact on the flow of project funds. So what can project owners and contractors do? We’ve got a few tips. 1. Read Your Contract, Paying Particular Attention to Force Majeure, No Damages for Delay and Notice Provisions For the most part, with the exception of statutory rights and remedies which we will discuss below, your contract spells out your rights and remedies should the proverbial “S” hit the fan. It is, in other words, the rules you agreed to, and you should know what those rules provide. Three provisions you should look for, and if they’re in your contract, you should review carefully are: (1) Force majeure provisions; (2) No damages for delay provisions; and (3) notice provisions. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Determining the Cause of the Loss from a Named Windstorm when there is Water Damage - New Jersey

    March 23, 2020 —
    Water damage, while one of the leading causes of loss under a property policy, often results in some of the most complex claims due to the intersection of exclusions, sublimits, and complex wording within the policy. One particularly difficult issue is whether water damage caused by a storm surge is covered by the flood sublimit, or under the general policy or water limit. In New Jersey Transit Corp. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s (“NJTC v. Lloyd’s”), the New Jersey Appeals Court found that the “flood” sublimit of the policy should not apply as the cause of the loss was a “named windstorm” and not a “flood.” In NJTC v Lloyd's the court was asked to determine whether a flood sublimit applied to losses sustained during Superstorm Sandy. The court found that although there was “flooding,” the water damage was more closely related to the “named windstorm”, and therefore, the $400 million policy limits should apply. The court focused its analysis on the definitions for “flood” and “named windstorm” and by applying the efficient proximate cause doctrine to determine which would apply. When reviewing the definitions within the property policies, the court determined that although the loss would qualify under the definition of “flood,” the policy also contained a definition for “named windstorm” which “more specifically encompasses the wind driven water or storm surge associated with a ‘named windstorm’”1. In addition, the policy did not specifically state that “storm surge” associated with a “named windstorm” should be considered a “flood” event and fall under the “flood” sublimit. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anna M. Perry, Saxe Doernberger & Vita
    Ms. Perry may be contacted at amp@sdvlaw.com

    Potential Extension of the Statutes of Limitation and Repose for Colorado Construction Defect Claims

    April 27, 2020 —
    On January 27th, Senator Robert Rodriguez introduced SB 20-138 into the Colorado Legislature. The bill has been assigned to the Senate Judiciary Committee and has not yet been scheduled for its first hearing in that committee. In short, Senate Bill 20-138, if enacted, would:
    1. Extend Colorado’s statute of repose for construction defects from 6+2 years to 10+2 years;
    2. Require tolling of the statute of repose until the claimant discovers not only the physical manifestation of a construction defect, but also its cause; and
    3. Permit statutory and equitable tolling of the statute of repose.
    Colorado’s statute of repose for construction defect claims are codified at C.R.S. § 13-80-104. In 1986, the Colorado Legislature set the statute of repose period at 6+2 years. For the last 34 years, Colorado’s statute of repose for owners’ claims against construction professionals has been substantially the same, to wit:
    (1) (a) Notwithstanding any statutory provision to the contrary, all actions against any architect, contractor, builder or builder vendor, engineer, or inspector performing or furnishing the design, planning, supervision, inspection, construction, or observation of construction of any improvement to real property shall be brought within the time provided in section 13-80-102 after the claim for relief arises, and not thereafter, but in no case shall such an action be brought more than six years after the substantial completion of the improvement to the real property, except as provided in subsection (2) of this section.
    (2) In case any such cause of action arises during the fifth or sixth year after substantial completion of the improvement to real property, said action shall be brought within two years after the date upon which said cause of action arises.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    COVID-19 Could Impact Contractor Performance Bonds

    March 30, 2020 —
    As COVID-19 continues to expand around the United States and the world, it may only be a matter of time before U.S. construction projects are affected by the virus. Performance bonds guarantee that a project will be completed by a contractor according to the contract. However, what if a contractor cannot complete a project on time due to widespread disease? What, if any, impact could the virus have on a contractor’s surety bond program? Risk Factors Several risks associated with the virus could trigger a performance bond claim. 1. Materials. The Chinese account for a large supply of construction materials, including steel, copper, cabinetry, etc. An inability to obtain these materials could significantly delay or stop a project all together. Even if a contractor is able to obtain them from other sources, it may be at a significantly higher cost than they put into the bid. 2. Labor. There is already a shortage of qualified labor in the construction industry. Additionally, construction already lends itself to the spreading of viruses; workers are often in close proximity, handling common materials, and they may not have an easily accessible place to wash their hands. Furthermore, even though many now have paid sick leave, there is often pressure not to use it. These things could magnify the labor shortage and make it difficult to complete projects on time. 3. Safety. Finally, the world is having a serious shortage of respirators. Because of widespread panic, many people have been purchasing N95 respirators—so much that the Surgeon General has asked people to stop buying them. It has created a shortage for people who really need them, like contractors. If contractors can’t get these safety masks, certain trades will either be unable to work, or risk continuing the project without masks, which would endanger workers and open them up to OSHA penalties. Reprinted courtesy of Ben Williams and MG Surety, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Williams may be contacted at benw@mgsuretybonds.com

    Virtual Jury Trials: The Next Wave of Remote Legal Practice

    July 13, 2020 —
    One of the most obvious and unavoidable results of the COVID-19 crisis has been the postponement of jury service and, by extension, all jury trials. Given the inherent difficulties of convening juries in a world of social distancing, it is likely that multiple jurisdictions will be unable to conduct live jury trials for at least the next several months. Recognizing the mounting delay and substantial docket backlog that is attendant to several months without jury trials, one court most recently permitted the litigants, upon consent, to try a new innovation – the nation’s first virtual jury trial conducted entirely on the Zoom platform. More than two dozen potential jurors in Collin County, Texas attended jury selection from home by smartphone, laptop, and tablet, a process that was streamed live on YouTube. The presiding judge occasionally provided prospective jurors technical advice on how to best use their devices. Once selected, the jurors virtually attended a one-day, “summary jury trial” of an insurance dispute in which they heard a condensed version of the case and delivered a non-binding verdict. The parties were then able to gauge how their cases would fare before a jury in a full-scale trial and, with that insight, agreed to proceed to a mediation in an attempt to reach a resolution. Court officials further touted the abbreviated, non-binding experience as an ideal test for the viability of remotely holding jury trials that would result in a final judgment. This real-world test, albeit in a non-binding exercise, may be an indication of things to come, as courts in Indiana and Arizona have already communicated an intention to conduct jury trials remotely once able. Reprinted courtesy of David R. Zaslow, White and Williams and Mark Paladino, White and Williams Mr. Zaslow may be contacted at zaslowd@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Paladino may be contacted at paladinom@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Subcontractors Found Liable to Reimburse Insurer Defense Costs in Equitable Subrogation Action

    August 03, 2020 —
    In Pulte Home Corp. v. CBR Electric, Inc. (No. E068353, filed 6/10/20), a California appeals court reversed the denial of an equitable subrogation claim for reimbursement of defense costs from contractually obligated subcontractors to a defending insurer, finding that all of the elements for equitable subrogation were met, and the equities tipped in favor of the insurer. After defending the general contractor, Pulte, in two construction defect actions as an additional insured on a subcontractor’s policy, St. Paul sought reimbursement of defense costs solely on an equitable subrogation theory against six subcontractors that had worked on the underlying construction projects, and whose subcontracts required them to defend Pulte in suits related to their work. After a bench trial, the trial court denied St. Paul’s claim, concluding that St. Paul had not demonstrated that it was fair to shift all of the defense costs to the subcontractors because their failure to defend Pulte had not caused the homeowners to bring the construction defect actions. The appeals court reversed, holding that the trial court misconstrued the law governing equitable subrogation. Because the relevant facts were not in dispute, the appeals court reviewed the case de novo and found that the trial court committed error in its denial of reimbursement for the defense fees. The appeals court found two errors: First, the trial court incorrectly concluded that equitable subrogation requires shifting of the entire loss. Second, the trial court applied a faulty causation analysis – that because the non-defending subcontractors had not caused the homeowners to sue Pulte, thereby necessitating a defense, St. Paul could not meet the elements of equitable subrogation. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Why Construction Firms Should Think Differently on the Issue of Sustainability

    May 25, 2020 —
    How does a construction company differentiate itself from the competition? If the company owner don’t know the answer to this question, or if the first thought that popped into his or her mind was a generic answer along the lines of customer service, keep reading. While all businesses should strive to deliver better results for their customers, if a construction firm is looking to stand out from the crowd, putting sustainability at the very center of everything it does will be a clear difference maker. Finding ways to divert construction and demolition (C&D) waste materials away from landfills and into recycling streams is a must. Keeping track of and measuring your C&D recycling rates on a per-project basis, and also company-wide, can be the difference between winning and losing a contract. Reprinted courtesy of Chris Batterson, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Batterson may be contacted at chris.batterson@rubiconglobal.com

    HHMR is pleased to announce that David McLain has been selected as a 2020 Super Lawyer

    June 29, 2020 —
    David McLain is a founding member of Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell. Mr. McLain has over 22 years of experience and is well known for his work in the defense of the construction industry, particularly in the area of construction defect litigation. He is a member of the Executive Committee of the CLM Claims College - School of Construction, which is the premier course for insurance, industry, and legal professionals. Law Week Colorado recently named Mr. McLain as the 2019 People’s Choice for Best Construction Defects Lawyer for Defendants. HHMR is highly regarded for its expertise in construction law and the litigation of construction-related claims, including the defense of large and complex construction defect matters. Our attorneys provide exceptional service to individuals, business owners, and Fortune 500 companies. The firm is experienced in providing legal support throughout trials and alternative dispute resolution such as mediations and arbitrations. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com