BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort expert witness Fort Yukon Alaska institutional building expert witness Fort Yukon Alaska landscaping construction expert witness Fort Yukon Alaska mid-rise construction expert witness Fort Yukon Alaska low-income housing expert witness Fort Yukon Alaska concrete tilt-up expert witness Fort Yukon Alaska structural steel construction expert witness Fort Yukon Alaska condominiums expert witness Fort Yukon Alaska condominium expert witness Fort Yukon Alaska custom homes expert witness Fort Yukon Alaska tract home expert witness Fort Yukon Alaska multi family housing expert witness Fort Yukon Alaska townhome construction expert witness Fort Yukon Alaska parking structure expert witness Fort Yukon Alaska custom home expert witness Fort Yukon Alaska office building expert witness Fort Yukon Alaska production housing expert witness Fort Yukon Alaska hospital construction expert witness Fort Yukon Alaska housing expert witness Fort Yukon Alaska retail construction expert witness Fort Yukon Alaska Subterranean parking expert witness Fort Yukon Alaska high-rise construction expert witness Fort Yukon Alaska
    Fort Yukon Alaska expert witness structural engineerFort Yukon Alaska expert witness commercial buildingsFort Yukon Alaska engineering consultantFort Yukon Alaska testifying construction expert witnessFort Yukon Alaska consulting engineersFort Yukon Alaska construction expert testimonyFort Yukon Alaska defective construction expert
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Fort Yukon, Alaska

    Alaska Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: HB151 limits the damages that can be awarded in a construction defect lawsuit to the actual cost of fixing the defect and other closely related costs such as reasonable temporary housing expenses during the repair of the defect, any reduction in market value cause by the defect, and reasonable and necessary attorney fees.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Fort Yukon Alaska

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Interior Alaska Builders Association
    Local # 0235
    938 Aspen Street
    Fairbanks, AK 99709

    Fort Yukon Alaska Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Mat-Su Home Builders Association
    Local # 0230
    609 S KNIK GOOSE BAY RD STE G
    Wasilla, AK 99654

    Fort Yukon Alaska Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Alaska
    Local # 0200
    8301 Schoon St Ste 200
    Anchorage, AK 99518

    Fort Yukon Alaska Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Anchorage
    Local # 0215
    8301 Schoon St Ste 200
    Anchorage, AK 99518

    Fort Yukon Alaska Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Kenai Peninsula Builders Association
    Local # 0233
    PO Box 1753
    Kenai, AK 99611

    Fort Yukon Alaska Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Northern Southeast Alaska Building Industry Association
    Local # 0225
    9085 Glacier Highway Ste 202
    Juneau, AK 99801

    Fort Yukon Alaska Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Southern Southeast Alaska Building Industry Association
    Local # 0240
    PO Box 6291
    Ketchikan, AK 99901

    Fort Yukon Alaska Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Fort Yukon Alaska


    No Coverage for Tenant's Breach of Contract Claims

    Duuers: Better Proposals with Less Work

    The Ghosts of Baha Mar: How a $3.5 Billion Paradise Went Bust

    Construction Halted in Wisconsin Due to Alleged Bid Issues

    President Trump’s Infrastructure Plan Requires a Viable Statutory Framework (PPP Statutes)[i]

    Construction Delays for China’s Bahamas Resort Project

    No Coverage for Negligent Misrepresentation without Allegations of “Bodily Injury” or “Property Damage”

    Affirmed: Nationwide Acted in Bad Faith by Failing to Settle Within Limits

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Adopts New Rule in Breach-of-the-Consent-to-Settle-Clause Cases

    Happenings in and around the West Coast Casualty Seminar

    New York City Construction: Boom Times Again?

    How Does Your Construction Contract Treat Float

    District Court denies Carpenters Union Motion to Dismiss RICO case- What it Means

    California Fire Lawyers File Suit Against PG&E on Behalf of More Than 50 Wildfire Victims

    Business Risk Exclusions Bar Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    April Rise in Construction Spending Not That Much

    Reference to "Man Made" Movement of Earth Corrects Ambiguity

    Broker's Motion for Summary Judgment on Negligence Claim Denied

    Court of Appeals Discusses Implied Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing in Public Works Contracting

    Contractor Sentenced to 7 Years for “Hail Damage” Fraud

    New Jersey Law Firm Sued for Malpractice in Construction Defect Litigation

    Boston Water Main Break Floods Trench and Kills Two Workers

    Louisiana Court Applies Manifestation Trigger to Affirm Denial of Coverage

    Sureties and Bond Producers May Be Liable For a Contractor’s False Claims Action Violation

    Better Building Rules Would Help U.K.'s Flooding Woes, CEP Says

    Appeals Court Affirms Civil Engineer Owes No Duty of Care to General Contractor

    U.S. District Court for Hawaii Again Determines Construction Defect Claims Do Not Arise From An Occurrence

    Construction Activity on the Upswing

    UConn’s Law-School Library Construction Case Settled for Millions

    California Indemnity and Defense Construction Law Changes for 2013

    WCC and BHA Raised Thousands for Children’s Cancer Research at 25th West Coast Casualty CD Seminar

    Certificate of Merit to Sue Architects or Engineers Bill Proposed

    Tesla’s Solar Roof Pricing Is Cheap Enough to Catch Fire

    Insured's Motion for Reconsideration on Denial of Coverage Unsuccessful

    Big Bertha Lawsuits—Hitachi Zosen Weighs In

    #9 CDJ Topic: Vallagio at Inverness Residential Condominium Association, Inc. v. Metropolitan Homes, Inc., et al.

    Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Shares Fall on Wind-Down Measure

    Two New Developments in Sanatoga, Pennsylvania

    Town Concerned Over Sinkhole at Condo Complex

    Feds Move To Indict NY Contractor Execs, Developer, Ex-Cuomo Aide

    Subcontractor’s Miller Act Payment Bond Claim

    Allegations that Carrier Failed to Adequately Investigate Survive Demurrer

    Potential Problems with Cases Involving One Owner and Multiple Contractors

    Google’s Floating Mystery Boxes Solved?

    Why Construction Law- An Update

    Part II: Key Provisions of School Facility Construction & Design Contracts

    U.S. Stocks Fluctuate Near Record After Housing Data

    Conflict of Interest Accusations may Spark Lawsuit Against City and City Manager

    No Coverage For Damage Caused by Chinese Drywall

    Subcontractors on Washington Public Projects can now get their Retainage Money Sooner
    Corporate Profile

    FORT YUKON ALASKA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fort Yukon, Alaska 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. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Fort Yukon'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
    Fort Yukon, Alaska

    Florida’s Fourth District Appeals Court Clarifies What Actions Satisfy Florida’s Construction Defect Statute of Repose

    November 14, 2018 —
    In Gindel v. Centex Homes, 2018 Fla.App. LEXIS 13019, Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal recently concluded that the date on which the plaintiffs provided a pre-suit notice in compliance with §558.004 of Florida’s construction defect Right-to-Cure statute, Fla. Stat. §§ 558.001 to 558.005, et. seq., is the date on which the plaintiff commenced a “civil action or proceeding,” i.e. an “action,” within the meaning of Florida’s construction defect statute of repose, Florida Statue § 95.11(3)(c). Thus, reversing the decision of the trial court, the Fourth District held that the plaintiffs timely-filed their construction defect action against the defendants. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Rahul Gogineni, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Gogineni may be contacted at goginenir@whiteandwilliams.com

    Fourth Circuit Issues New Ruling on Point Sources Under the CWA

    October 02, 2018 —
    The Clean Water Act (CWA) authorizes citizen suits to enforce the provisions of the law which requires a permit to discharge a pollutant from a point source into navigable waters. Earlier this year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, in Upstate Forever v. Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, held that discharges into groundwater, not surface water, could also trigger the regulatory authority of the CWA if there was a hydrological connection between the groundwater and the navigable, surface, waters. In its a closely-watched case, Sierra Club v. Virginia Electric & Power Company (“VEPCO”), which also involved discharges into groundwater, the Fourth Circuit was bound by this this new and controversial precedent (a Supreme Court review is very likely), but the plaintiffs in the VEPCO case could not establish that the landfill and the settling ponds used by VEPCO were “point sources”—another important element that must be established. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Windstorm Exclusion Found Ambiguous

    September 10, 2018 —
    The Second Circuit reversed the District Court's issuance of summary judgment to the insurer because a windstorm exclusion was deemed ambiguous. 7001 East 71st Street, LLC v. Continental Cas. Co., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 17334 (2nd Cir. June 26, 2018). A windstorm during Hurricane Sandy caused the roof of 7001 East 71st Street LLC (7001) to tear, allowing rainwater to seep in and damage 7001's "Covered Equipment" as defined by the policy. Continental denied coverage based upon the windstorm exclusion and the district court granted summary judgment to Continental. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    The “Right to Repair” Construction Defects in the Rocky Mountain and Plains Region

    October 16, 2018 —
    In excess of 30 states have enacted tort reform legislation requiring property owners to notify construction professionals of the presence of alleged construction defects prior to the commencement of a lawsuit. These statutes also often permit construction professionals to make an offer of repair within a statutorily defined period of time after receipt of a notice of claim letter. Undoubtedly, the notice-of-claim process has played a meaningful part in bringing construction professionals and claimants to timely resolutions of construction defect concerns in isolated instances. However, while these statutes are commonly referred to as “right of repair” legislation, their practical effect is often reduced to little more than procedural empty gestures serving as a prelude to litigation. This article will briefly survey the “right to repair” statutes in Colorado, Montana, North Dakota and South Dakota. In Nebraska, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming there is no right to repair or notice-of claim statue. Reprinted courtesy of Jean Meyer, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell LLC and Sheri Roswell, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell LLC Mr. Bracken, may be contacted at meyer@hhmrlaw.com  Ms. Russo may be contacted at roswell@hhmrlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Massachusetts SJC Clarifies “Strict Compliance” Standard in Construction Contracts

    January 02, 2019 —
    In Massachusetts, it is well established that a contractor cannot recover damages from a construction contract without first showing that the contractor completely and strictly performed on all of the contract’s terms. Recently, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court narrowed the rule by concluding that complete and strict performance is only required for contract terms relating to the design and construction itself. The high Court explained that non-design / non-construction contract terms are governing by “ordinary contract principles, including the traditional Massachusetts materiality rule.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jacob Goodelman, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani
    Mr. Goodelman may be contacted at jgoodelman@grsm.com

    New York Court of Appeals Addresses Choice of Law Challenges

    August 20, 2018 —
    In June, the New York Court of Appeals examined the application of a New York Choice of Law provision in a contract – a determinative issue for the case. In Ontario, Inc. v. Samsung C&T Corp., the issue was whether the plaintiff’s claims were subject to Ontario, Canada’s 2-year statute of limitations or New York’s 6-year statute of limitations for breach of contract where the contract contained a broad New York Choice of Law provision. The court found that pursuant to New York’s borrowing statute, Ontario’s more restrictive statute of limitations applied. The action was dismissed as time-barred, serving as a harsh reminder of the potential effects of choice of law and limitations periods. The suit arose out of the following facts. In 2008, an Ontario renewable energy developer, SkyPower Corp. (“SkyPower”), entered into a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) with the defendants which allowed the defendants to review SkyPower’s confidential and proprietary information. The review was conditioned on restricted disclosure and the requirement that the information would be destroyed after review. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Grace V. Hebbel, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Hebbel may be contacted at gvh@sdvlaw.com

    $109-Million Renovation Begins on LA's Willowbrook/Rosa Parks Station

    October 02, 2018 —
    The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro), along with the Los Angeles office of Stantec, recently began work on the $109-million Willowbrook/Rosa Parks Station Improvement Project in Los Angeles. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Greg Aragon, ENR
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    The Hidden Price of Outdated Damage Prevention Laws: Part I

    November 21, 2018 —
    Excavators know that dialing 811 triggers a process that requires all utilities operating in the service area to find and mark the location of their underground facilities so that they are not damaged during the excavation process. In addition, marking the location of the utilities is intended to keep the public safe, for instance by preventing an excavator from striking a gas line. But excavators also know that in most states, the laws and regulations that govern these procedures are weak and that enforcement is even weaker. It’s an unfortunate fact that excavators and the public – typically the least culpable parties – suffer the consequences of weak damage prevention laws and lack of strong enforcement regimes. Reprinted courtesy of Brigham A. McCown, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of