• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Medical building expert witness Pilot Station Alaska tract home expert witness Pilot Station Alaska condominiums expert witness Pilot Station Alaska institutional building expert witness Pilot Station Alaska housing expert witness Pilot Station Alaska multi family housing expert witness Pilot Station Alaska parking structure expert witness Pilot Station Alaska high-rise construction expert witness Pilot Station Alaska concrete tilt-up expert witness Pilot Station Alaska mid-rise construction expert witness Pilot Station Alaska retail construction expert witness Pilot Station Alaska low-income housing expert witness Pilot Station Alaska custom homes expert witness Pilot Station Alaska Subterranean parking expert witness Pilot Station Alaska townhome construction expert witness Pilot Station Alaska industrial building expert witness Pilot Station Alaska office building expert witness Pilot Station Alaska hospital construction expert witness Pilot Station Alaska condominium expert witness Pilot Station Alaska production housing expert witness Pilot Station Alaska landscaping construction expert witness Pilot Station Alaska casino resort expert witness Pilot Station Alaska
    Pilot Station Alaska construction expertsPilot Station Alaska ada design expert witnessPilot Station Alaska expert witness windowsPilot Station Alaska consulting general contractorPilot Station Alaska building envelope expert witnessPilot Station Alaska expert witness concrete failurePilot Station Alaska forensic architect
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Pilot Station, 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 Pilot Station Alaska

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required

    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Mat-Su Home Builders Association
    Local # 0230
    Wasilla, AK 99654

    Pilot Station Alaska Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Pilot Station Alaska Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Pilot Station Alaska Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Pilot Station Alaska Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Interior Alaska Builders Association
    Local # 0235
    938 Aspen Street
    Fairbanks, AK 99709

    Pilot Station Alaska Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Pilot Station Alaska Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Pilot Station Alaska Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Pilot Station Alaska

    The Need for Situational Awareness in Construction

    Inspectors Hurry to Make Sure Welds Are Right before Bay Bridge Opening

    Gary Bague Elected Chairman of ALFA International’s Board of Directors

    Efficient Proximate Cause Applies to Policy's Collapse Provisions

    U.K. Broadens Crackdown on Archaic Property Leasehold System

    New OSHA Fall Rules to Start Early in Minnesota

    Bill Seeks to Protect Legitimate Contractors

    Homeowners Not Compelled to Arbitration in Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Repair of Fractured Girders Complete at Shuttered Salesforce Transit Center

    No Entitlement to Reimbursement of Pre-Tender Fees

    Liability Cap Does Not Exclude Defense Costs for Loss Related to Deep Water Horizon

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Lisa M. Rolle and Vito John Marzano Secure Dismissal of Indemnification and Breach of Contract Claims Asserted against Subcontractor

    Residential Construction: Shrinking Now, Growing Later?

    New Safety Standards Issued by ASSE and ANSI

    When Coronavirus Cases Spike at Construction Jobsites

    Tests Find Pollution From N.C. Coal Ash Site Hit by Florence Within Acceptable Levels

    Spearin Doctrine 100 Years Old and Still Thriving in the Design-Build Delivery World

    California Supreme Court Endorses City Authority to Adopt Inclusionary Housing Ordinance

    Update Coverage for Construction Defect Claims in Colorado

    US-Mexico Border Wall Bids Include Tourist Attraction, Solar Panels

    Insurance Company Prevails in “Chinese Drywall” Case

    One Word Makes All The Difference – The Distinction Between “Pay If Paid” and “Pay When Paid” Clauses

    Spearin Doctrine: Alive, Well and Thriving on its 100th Birthday

    Vermont Supreme Court Reverses, Finding No Coverage for Collapse

    Property Damage Caused By Construction Next Door Covered as Ensuing Loss

    Foreclosure Deficiency: Construction Loan vs. Home Improvement Loan

    Recent Bad Faith Decisions in Florida Raise Concerns

    Second Circuit Finds Potential Ambiguity in Competing “Anti-Concurrent Cause” Provisions in Hurricane Sandy Property Loss

    Taking Care of Infrastructure – Interview with Marilyn Grabowski

    Court of Appeal Confirms Privette Doctrine as Applied to Passive Conduct of Property Owner

    Shaken? Stirred? A Primer on License Bond Claims in California

    Tacoma Construction Site Uncovers Gravestones

    Appeals Court Overruled Insured as Additional Insured on Subcontractor’s Commercial General Liability Policy

    Trial Date Discussed for Las Vegas HOA Takeover Case

    Construction Lien Waiver Provisions Contractors Should Be Using

    Your Contract is a Hodgepodge of Conflicting Proposals

    No Occurrence Where Contract Provides for Delays

    Sometimes a Reminder is in Order. . .

    White and Williams LLP Secures Affirmation of Denial to Change Trial Settings Based on Plaintiffs’ Failure to Meet the Texas Causation Standard for Asbestos Cases

    Revel Closing Shows Gambling Is No Sure Thing for Renewal

    What to Know Before Building a Guesthouse

    Newmeyer & Dillion Gets Top-Tier Practice Area Rankings on U.S. News – Best Lawyers List

    Nevada Senate Minority Leader Confident about Construction Defect Bill

    County Officials Refute Resident’s Statement that Defect Repairs Improper

    When Can a General Contractor’s Knowledge be Imputed to a Developer?

    Court Calls Lease-Leaseback Project What it is: A Design-Bid-Build Project

    General Contractors: Consider Importance of "Primary Noncontributory" Language

    Construction Law Client Alert: Hirer Beware - When Exercising Control Over a Job Site’s Safety Conditions, You May be Held Directly Liable for an Independent Contractor’s Injury

    Blog: Congress Strikes a Blow to President Obama’s “Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces” Executive Order 13673

    Chinese Lead $92 Billion of U.S. Home Sales to Foreigners
    Corporate Profile


    The Pilot Station, 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 Pilot Station'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
    Pilot Station, Alaska

    COVID-19 Response: Recent Executive Orders Present Opportunities for Businesses Seeking Regulatory and Enforcement Relief and Expedited Project Development

    June 15, 2020 —
    Washington, D.C. (June 8, 2020) - Two recent Executive Orders (EO) aimed at promoting economic recovery from the COVID-19 crisis offer regulatory and enforcement relief and encourage agencies to expedite infrastructure project approvals. The May 19, 2020 EO 13924, “Regulatory Relief to Support Economic Recovery,” directs agencies to determine whether previous regulatory reforms would promote economic recovery if made permanent and encourages compliance assistance through exercising enforcement discretion, including declining enforcement. And the June 4, 2020 EO 13927, “Accelerating the Nation’s Economic Recovery from the COVID-19 Emergency by Expediting Infrastructure Investments and Other Activities,” aims to speed up the permitting process for infrastructure projects to strengthen the national economy. As businesses look to move forward and recover from the COVID-19 pandemic, they should closely review these EOs for opportunities to take advantage of streamlined treatment and faster project approvals. EO 13294 supplements the Administration’s efforts to address the economic crisis brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic by encouraging federal agencies to rescind, modify, waive, or provide exemptions from federal regulations that may inhibit economic recovery and to provide guidance to businesses, particularly small businesses, on what is required of them under federal law for reopening. Specifically, the EO directs agency heads to identify regulatory standards that may inhibit economic recovery and consider rescinding or waiving those regulations, exempting regulated entities from compliance, exercising enforcement discretion, or extending regulatory compliance and enforcement deadlines. It also allows for compliance assistance through accelerated regulatory procedures to receive a pre-enforcement ruling and directs agencies to assess previous regulatory reforms to determine whether making them permanent would promote economic recovery. Since taking office, the Trump Administration has made regulatory reform a cornerstone of its agenda. This Executive Order is a continuation of the aggressive steps taken by the Administration to reduce the regulatory burden faced by American businesses that many argue increases operating costs, inhibits job creation, and stifles economic growth. Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois attorneys Karen C. Bennett, Jane C. Luxton and Amanda L. Tharpe Ms. Bennett may be contacted at Ms. Luxton may be contacted at Ms. Tharpe may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Collapse of Underground Storage Cave Not Covered

    June 29, 2020 —
    The Eighth Circuit faced unusual facts in determining that the collapse of a cave serving as a storage facility was not covered under the policy. Westchester Surplus Lines Ins. Co. v. Interstate Underground Warehouse & Storage, Inc., 2020 U. S. App. LEXIS 83 8th Cir. Jan. 3, 2020). Interstate operated an underground storage facility in a cave that formerly housed a limestone mine. In 2014, Interstate experienced a series of "dome-outs," in which layers of rock destabilized, detached, and collapsed from above into the cave. Interstate's policy with Westchester included coverage for collapse of a "building" caused by "building decay." Westchester sought a declaratory judgment that Interstate's loss was not covered. The district court granted summary judgment for Westchester because the cause of the loss was not "building decay" within the meaning of the primary policy. 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

    Gordon & Rees Ranks #5 in Top 50 Construction Law Firms in the Nation

    June 29, 2020 —
    Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani has been ranked the #5 construction law firm in the nation by Construction Executive in the magazine’s 2020 ranking of The Top 50 Construction Law Firms. Gordon & Rees is the only California-based law firm to rank in the Top 25. The firm was ranked in the Top 10 in more specific areas as well.
    • #1 in the Top 10 Law Firms Ranked by Most Locations
    • #2 in the Top 10 Law Firms Ranked by Number of Construction Attorneys
    • #6 in the Top 10 Law Firms Ranked by Number of States Admitted to Practice
    “With offices throughout the nation and outstanding construction attorneys in many of those offices, we are able to offer our construction clients a diverse range of legal services wherever they do business,” said Ernie Isola partner and co-chair of the firm’s construction practice group. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani

    Coronavirus and Contract Obligations

    March 30, 2020 —
    The Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has caused a global disruption to businesses, causing many to temporarily close and lay off employees. As businesses assess the short– and long–term economic impact of COVID-19, they should also evaluate what contractual obligations and remedies are available under various agreements (e.g., leases, vendor agreements, and supply agreements). When performance may be delayed or may not occur altogether, businesses should consider their force majeure clauses, if any, and the doctrines of impossibility, impracticability, and frustration of purpose. Force Majeure Generally, unless a contract provides that performance will be suspended or relieved when certain events occur (e.g., “acts of God,” government regulation, acts of war or terror, strikes), each party is obligated to perform. However, when there is an express force majeure provision, certain events or acts may excuse non-performance or delayed performance. But depending on the jurisdiction, courts may construe force majeure provisions narrowly and excuse performance only for those events expressly listed in the clause. Nonetheless, if the force majeure provision includes pandemic, epidemic, quarantine, government act, disease, or similar terms, then the COVID-19 pandemic may excuse performance or allow delayed performance. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David R. Cook, Autry, Hall & Cook, LLP
    Mr. Cook may be contacted at

    Employee Screening and Testing in the Covid-19 Era: Getting Back to Work

    August 10, 2020 —
    Currently Available Workplace Protocols for Employers Employers seeking to minimize the risk of COVID-19 transmission in the workplace should consider from among the three currently available protocols: Written Questionnaires; Temperature Checks; and Viral or Diagnostic Testing. When implementing a screening or testing protocol, employers should explain the following in writing to employees: (1) the specific screening process or test utilized by the employer; (2) employee compliance expectations and any consequences for a refusal to participate; (3) how employee privacy will be protected; (4) if screening, the general benchmarks that indicate the employee has “passed” (e.g., temperature below 100.4ºF, per CDC guidelines); and (5) the outcome of an unsuccessful screen or test (e.g., being sent home from the workplace). Employers must also ensure that those administering the screening and/or testing are properly trained, and that appropriate written acknowledgements are obtained from employees consenting to the applicable protocol. Reprinted courtesy of Aaron C. Schlesinger, Peckar & Abramson and Shannon D. Azzaro, Peckar & Abramson Mr. Schlesinger may be contacted at Ms. Azzaro may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    COVID-19 Response: Key Legal Considerations for Event Cancellations

    March 30, 2020 —
    Every passing day brings stark new reports of novel coronavirus (COVID-19) cases and increasing numbers of cancelled conventions, concerts, and other major events. Both the hospitality and travel industry on the one hand, and organizations that are canceling events on the other, are scrambling to understand the legal consequences of these costly terminations. Cancellation fees can be breathtaking, and affected parties are quickly learning that there are no simple answers as to whether a disease outbreak of this scope and scale falls within force majeure (or Act of God) clauses that either do not explicitly list, or arguably may never have contemplated, circumstances of this type. Generally, force majeure clauses excuse parties’ performance under a contract when circumstances that are beyond their control arise and prevent them from fulfilling their obligations. The party electing to enforce its rights under the force majeure clause must show that the triggering event qualifies as a force majeure event, and that the event has rendered the party’s performance impossible or impracticable. Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois attorneys Michael G. Platner, Solomon B. Zoberman and Jane C. Luxton Mr. Platner may be contacted at Mr. Zoberman may be contacted at Ms. Luxton may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Contractor Prevailing Against Subcontractor On Common Law Indemnity Claim

    June 29, 2020 —
    Common law indemnity is not an easy claim to prove as the one seeking common law indemnity MUST be without fault: Indemnity is a right which inures to one who discharges a duty owed by him, but which, as between himself and another, should have been discharged by the other and is allowable only where the whole fault is in the one against whom indemnity is sought. It shifts the entire loss from one who, although without active negligence or fault, has been obligated to pay, because of some vicarious, constructive, derivative, or technical liability, to another who should bear the costs because it was the latter’s wrongdoing for which the former is held liable. Brother’s Painting & Pressure Cleaning Corp. v. Curry-Dixon Construction, LLC, 45 Fla. L. Weekly D259b (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) quoting Houdaille Industries, Inc. v. Edwards, 374 So.2d 490, 492-93 (Fla. 1979). Not only must the one seeking common law indemnity be without fault, but there also needs to be a special relationship between the parties (indemnitee and common law indemnitor) for common law indemnification to exist. Brother’s Painting & Pressure Cleaning Corp., supra (citation omitted). A special relationship has been found to exist between a general contractor and its subcontractors. Id. at n.2. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at

    Will European Insurers’ Positive Response to COVID-19 Claims Influence US Insurers?

    August 10, 2020 —
    Last month we wrote a piece concerning AXA’s agreement to pay COVID-19 related business interruption claims by a group of restaurants in France after a court ruled that the restaurants’ revenue losses resulting from COVID-19 and related government orders were covered under its insurance policies. AXA reportedly has already agreed to pay over 200 COVID-19 related claims. Another European insurer recently made headlines for similar reasons. Despite initially denying liability, Swiss insurance company, Helvetia Insurance, announced that most of its policyholders in the hospitality industry have accepted settlements following coverage disputes for COVID-19 related business interruption losses. The settlements reportedly included policyholders from Switzerland, Austria, and Germany. The positive response from the European insurers appears to have influenced the insurance industry across the continent. For instance, in the U.K., the Financial Conduct Authority announced that it is taking certain insurers to court to seek clarity as to coverage for COVID-19 related losses. In Germany, the government and a group of insurers reached an agreement whereby the government will pay for 70% of business interruption losses for policyholders in the hospitality industry, and the insurers will pay for half of the business interruption losses not covered by the government. Reprinted courtesy of Sergio F. Oehninger, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Daniel Hentschel, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Oehninger may be contacted at Mr. Hentschel may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of