BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing expert witness Samson Alabama institutional building expert witness Samson Alabama parking structure expert witness Samson Alabama condominiums expert witness Samson Alabama landscaping construction expert witness Samson Alabama condominium expert witness Samson Alabama office building expert witness Samson Alabama townhome construction expert witness Samson Alabama tract home expert witness Samson Alabama mid-rise construction expert witness Samson Alabama Medical building expert witness Samson Alabama high-rise construction expert witness Samson Alabama production housing expert witness Samson Alabama hospital construction expert witness Samson Alabama custom homes expert witness Samson Alabama custom home expert witness Samson Alabama multi family housing expert witness Samson Alabama structural steel construction expert witness Samson Alabama Subterranean parking expert witness Samson Alabama concrete tilt-up expert witness Samson Alabama industrial building expert witness Samson Alabama retail construction expert witness Samson Alabama
    Samson Alabama construction claims expert witnessSamson Alabama construction cost estimating expert witnessSamson Alabama construction expertsSamson Alabama hospital construction expert witnessSamson Alabama construction claims expert witnessSamson Alabama expert witness concrete failureSamson Alabama construction expert witness public projects
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Samson, 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 Samson 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
    Samson Alabama Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

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

    Samson Alabama Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

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

    Samson Alabama Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Samson Alabama Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Samson Alabama Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Samson Alabama


    Legislative Changes that Impact Construction 2017

    Former UN General Assembly President Charged in Bribe Scheme

    Occurrence Definition Trends Analyzed

    "Ordinance or Law" Provision Mandates Coverage for Roof Repair

    Utah Supreme Court Allows Citizens to Block Real Estate Development Project by Voter Referendum

    Neither Designated Work Exclusion nor Pre-Existing Damage Exclusion Defeat Duty to Defend

    Oregon to Add 258,000 Jobs by 2022, State Data Shows

    Gen Xers Choose to Rent rather than Buy

    Boys (and Girls) of Summer: New Residential Solar Energy System Disclosures Take Effect January 1, 2019

    No Jail Time for Disbarred Construction Defect Lawyer

    Risk Management and Contracting after Hurricane Irma: Suggestions to Avoid a Second Disaster

    Coverage Doomed for Failing Obtain Insurer's Consent for Settlement

    Landmark Towers Association, Inc. v. UMB Bank, N.A. or: One Bad Apple Spoils the Whole Bunch

    Anti-Concurrent, Anti-Sequential Causation Clause Precludes Coverage

    Don’t Miss the 2015 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar

    Unlicensed Contractors Caught in a Sting Operation

    Serving the 558 Notice of Construction Defect Letter in Light of the Statute of Repose

    The "Dark Overlord" Strikes The Practice Of Law: What Law Firms Can Do To Protect Themselves

    Surge in Home Completions Tamps Down Inflation as Fed Meets

    Second Circuit Court Differentiates the Standard for Determining Evident Partiality for a Neutral Arbitrator and a Party-Appointed Arbitrator

    Hospital Settles Lawsuit over Construction Problems

    A Third of U.S. Homebuyers Are Bidding Sight Unseen

    Surety's Settlement Without Principal's Consent Is Not Bad Faith

    Oregon agreement to procure insurance, anti-indemnity statute, and self-insured retention

    Lightstone Committing $2 Billion to Hotel Projects

    Heathrow Speeds New-Runway Spending Before Construction Approval

    “Details Matter” is the Foundation in a Texas Construction Defect Suit

    DRCOG’s Findings on the Impact of Construction Defect Litigation Have Been Released (And the Results Should Not Surprise You)

    Roof's "Cosmetic" Damage From Hail Storm Covered

    Boston Nonprofit Wants to Put Grown-Ups in Dorms

    Civil RICO Case Against Johnny Doc Is Challenging

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

    Dreyer v. Am. Natl. Prop. & Cas. Co. Or: Do Not Enter into Nunn-Agreements for Injuries that Occurred After Expiration of the Subject Insurance Policy

    Former Mayor Arrested for Violating Stop Work Order

    Ontario Court of Appeal Clarifies the Meaning of "Living in the Same Household" for Purposes of Coverage Under a Homeowners Policy

    Boston’s Tunnel Project Plagued by Water

    Property Owner’s Defense Goes Up in Smoke in Careless Smoking Case

    Colorado homebuilders target low-income buyers with bogus "affordable housing" bill

    Economic Damages and the Right to Repair Act: You Can’t Have it Both Ways

    General Contractors Must Plan to Limit Liability for Subcontractor Injury

    Arizona Supreme Court Clarifies Area Variance Standard; Property Owners May Obtain an Area Variance When Special Circumstances Existed at Purchase

    Is Arbitration Okay Under the Miller Act? It Is if You Don’t Object

    Broker's Motion for Summary Judgment on Negligence Claim Denied

    California Supreme Court Rights the “Occurrence” Ship: Unintended Harm Resulting from Intentional Conduct Triggers Coverage Under Liability Insurance Policy

    French President Vows to Rebuild Fire-Collapsed Notre Dame Roof and Iconic Spire

    Crowdfunding Comes to Manhattan’s World Trade Center

    Haight Ranked in 2018 U.S. News - Best Lawyers "Best Law Firms" List

    NYC Developer Embraces Religion in Search for Condo Sites

    Economic Damages Cannot be Based On Speculation

    New Law Impacting Florida’s Statute of Repose
    Corporate Profile

    SAMSON ALABAMA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Samson, 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 Samson'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
    Samson, Alabama

    Good-To-Know Points Regarding (I) Miller Act Payment Bonds And (Ii) Payment Bond Surety Compelling Arbitration

    December 22, 2019 —
    Every now and then I come across an opinion that addresses good-to-know legal issues as a corollary of strategic litigation decisions that are questionable and/or creative. An opinion out of the United States District Court of New Mexico, Rock Roofing, LLC v. Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America, 2019 WL 4418918 (D. New Mexico 2019), is such an opinion. In Rock Roofing, an owner hired a contractor to construct apartments. The contractor furnished a payment bond. The contractor, in the performance of its work, hired a roofing subcontractor. A dispute arose under the subcontract and the roofer recorded a construction lien against the project. The contractor, per New Mexico law, obtained a bond to release the roofer’s construction lien from the project (real property). The roofer then filed a lawsuit in federal court against the payment bond surety claiming it is entitled to: (1) collect on the contractor’s Miller Act payment bond (?!?) and (2) foreclose its construction lien against the lien release bond furnished per New Mexico law. Count I – Miller Act Payment Bond Claiming the payment bond issued by the contractor is a Miller Act payment bond is a head scratcher. This claim was dismissed with prejudice upon the surety’s motion to dismiss. This was an easy call. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Economic Loss Not Property Damage

    November 04, 2019 —
    The Fifth Circuit agreed with the district court that the insured subcontractor's economic losses did not amount to covered property damage. Greenwich Ins. Co. v. Capsco Industries, Inc., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 23949 (5th Cir. Aug 12, 2019). Capsco Industries, Inc. was a subcontractor on the construction of a casino. Capsco subcontracted with Ground Control to install water, sewage, and storm-drain lines. Ground Control was terminated from the project by the general contractor for alleged safety violations and failed drug tests of its employees. Ground Control sued in state court against multiple parties, including Capsco, seeking payment for work on the project. The claims were dismissed on summary judgment because neither party had obtained the required certificates of responsibility from the state, making the parties' contract void. The Mississippi Supreme Court agreed the contract was void, but reversed and remanded for further proceedings based solely on theories of unjust enrichment and quantum meruit. While the state case was on remand, Capsco's liability insurers, Greenwich Insurance Company and Indian Harbor Insurance Company, filed a compliant for declaratory judgment in federal district court seeking a declaration that they did not owe a defense or indemnity to Capsco. The defendants were Ground Control, Capsco, the general contractor, and the casino owner. The latter two parties were dismissed. Ground Control counterclaimed for coverage of its claims against Capsco. The district court stayed proceedings until the state court litigation ended. 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

    Top 10 Cases of 2019

    February 10, 2020 —
    In the 2019 edition of SDV’s Top Ten Insurance Cases, we probe wiretapping claims under an armed security services policy, delicately sniff out E&O coverage for a company using cow manure to create electricity, scour the earth for coverage for crumbling foundation claims, and inspect D&O policies for government investigation coverage. In addition, we preview some important and exciting decisions due in 2020. Without further ado, SDV raises the curtain on the most informative and influential insurance coverage decisions of 2019.1 1. ACE American Ins. Co. v. American Medical Plumbing, Inc., 206 A.3d 437 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2019) April 4, 2019 Is waiver of subrogation language in a standard AIA201 contract sufficient to bar an insurer’s subrogation rights? The New Jersey Supreme Court held that it was. Equinox Development obtained a comprehensive blanket all-risk policy with limits of $32 million per occurrence from ACE American Ins. Co. (“ACE”). The policy covered Equinox’s new project in Summit, New Jersey. Equinox hired Grace Construction as GC, who in turn subcontracted the plumbing scope of work to American Medical Plumbing, Inc. (“American”). After completion of the work under the subcontract, a water main failed and flooded the entire project. ACE paid the limits of the policy and subrogated against American to recover its losses. American argued that there was a waiver of subrogation in the AIA201 contract that barred the suit. ACE challenged the validity of the AIA provision, arguing that it applied only to claims before completion of construction and that it only applied to damage to the work itself and not to adjacent property. The court rejected both arguments, finding that the AIA provision effectively barred ACE’s subrogation claim. This decision provides guidance on a frequently used contract form for contractors across the country. Reprinted courtesy of Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. attorneys Jeffrey J. Vita, Grace V. Hebbel and Andrew G. Heckler Mr. Vita may be contacted at jjv@sdvlaw.com Ms. Hebbel may be contacted at gvh@sdvlaw.com Mr. Heckler may be contacted at agh@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Congratulations to Jonathan Kaplan on his Promotion to Partner!

    February 10, 2020 —
    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP is proud to announce the promotion of Jonathan Kaplan to Partner! Jonathan has been with the firm for nearly eight years out of our Newport Beach office. He focuses his practice on general liability defense and construction litigation matters, in addition to handling high-profile plaintiff defect cases. Jonathan earned his law degree from Chapman University School of Law, obtaining a certificate in Environmental, Real Estate and Land Use Law, and went to undergrad at the University of Washington. Jonathan is an active participant within the firm’s Hiring Committee and assists with legal recruitment at the prominent Orange County law schools. Jonathan is also an avid hiker and has coordinated several hiking events for our Southern California offices. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Five LEED and Green Construction Trends to Watch in 2020

    January 27, 2020 —
    To succeed in any field, you can never stop learning—especially in the green construction industry where standards and technology are always growing and changing. Here are a few of the exciting trends in LEED certification and green construction learned about during this year’s Greenbuild International Conference and Expo, which is the largest annual event for green building professionals in the world. 1. More Transparency About Products In 2020, the product sustainability information provided by manufacturers will continue becoming more transparent and accessible. Manufacturers are coming to the table and presenting more useful information on environmental and health impacts, conducting life cycle analyses and making the information available for the design and construction marketplace. Although this means even more information for construction and design teams to take into account when planning green construction projects, it’s a definite positive. We’re starting to see the actual environmental performance getting taken into account in product specification. Reprinted courtesy of Tommy Linstroth, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Corporate Formalities: A Necessary Part of Business

    February 18, 2020 —
    Many benefits exist in choosing to create a corporation or limited liability company (“LLC”) as your business entity. However, what attracts most people to these entities is the protection they afford the business owner(s) against personal liability for the business’ obligations, debts, and other liabilities. Whatever reason prompts your decision to form a corporation or LLC, if you are like many smaller businesses, once the formation process is over its back to business as usual. However, in order to keep the protection against personal liability associated with a corporation or LLC, the business must engage in, what are known as corporate formalities. Corporate formalities are formal actions that must be taken by a corporation or LLC in order to maintain the benefits associated with that business entity. These corporate formalities may be required under California law, by the bylaws, and/or by the operating agreement of your business. When your business is formed as a corporation, many of the corporate formalities exist as part of California’s Corporations Code (“CCC”). These formalities include: (1) holding annual meetings (CCC § 600); (2) regularly electing directors (CCC § 301); (3) keeping meeting minutes (CCC § 1500); and (4) maintaining accurate corporate records (CCC § 1500). While these are only a few of the corporate formalities existing for corporations in the State of California, these formalities are often overlooked or put off by smaller businesses because they are either unknown to the business or are intended to be complied with later, as the actual running of the business takes priority. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Hannah Kreuser, Porter Law Group
    Ms. Kreuser may be contacted at hkreuser@porterlaw.com

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2020

    December 22, 2019 —
    White and Williams has achieved national recognition from U.S. News and World Report as a "Best Law Firm" in the practice areas of Insurance Law and Media Law. Our Boston, New York and Philadelphia offices have also been recognized in their respective metropolitan regions in several practice areas. Firms included in the “Best Law Firms” list are recognized for professional excellence with persistently impressive ratings from clients and peers. Achieving a tiered ranking signals a unique combination of quality law practice and breadth of legal experience. National Tier 1 Insurance Law National Tier 3 Media Law Metropolitan Tier 1 Boston Product Liability Litigation – Defendants Delaware Product Liability Litigation – Defendants New Jersey Labor Law – Management Philadelphia Commercial Litigation Insurance Law Medical Malpractice Law – Defendants Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants Personal Injury Litigation – Plaintiffs Metropolitan Tier 2 Boston Insurance Law Delaware Medical Malpractice Law – Defendants New Jersey Employment Law - Management Litigation - Labor & Employment Philadelphia Bet-the-Company Litigation Legal Malpractice Law – Defendants Media Law Real Estate Law Tax Law Trusts & Estates Law Metropolitan Tier 3 New York City Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law Philadelphia Appellate Practice Construction Law First Amendment Law Litigation – Construction Litigation – Labor & Employment Patent Law Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    Illinois Favors Finding Construction Defects as an Occurrence

    September 23, 2019 —
    A recent Illinois Appellate Court’s decision in, Acuity Ins. Co. v. 950 West Huron Condominium Owners Association, 2019 IL App (1st) 180743 (2019), strengthens Illinois’ precedent favoring construction defects as an occurrence under a Commercial General Liability (“CGL”) insurance policy. Acuity also broadens an insurance carrier’s obligation to defend its insured against construction defect allegations. In Acuity, the court determined whether claims for construction defect filed against a subcontractor, triggered a duty to defend under a CGL policy. To make its determination, the court focused on the subcontractor’s scope of work. The court notes that a subcontractor normally contracts for a discrete scope of work on a project. Unlike a general contractor, who has control over or contractual obligations for all aspects of the project, a subcontractor does not have those board responsibilities. The court explained that “[f]rom the eyes of the subcontractor, the ‘project’ is limited to the scope of its own work, and the precise nature of any damage that might occur to something outside of that scope is as unknown or unforeseeable as damage to something entirely outside of the construction project.” Accordingly, the court in Acuity held that when a complaint alleges that a subcontractor’s negligence caused damage to a part of the construction project outside of the subcontractor’s scope of work, the allegations are enough to trigger the insurer’s duty to defend the subcontractor under a CGL policy. The court’s decision in Acuity relied on a similar Illinois Appellate Court decision, Milwaukee Mut. Ins. Co. v. J.P. Larsen, Inc., 956 N.E.2d 524 (Ill. App. 2011). In Larsen, the court reached a similar conclusion where a third-party complaint by a general contractor against a subcontractor alleged that the subcontractor’s improper window caulking caused water intrusion and property damage to other parts of the building. The court in Larsen held that because the complaint alleged not only construction defects, but also damage to other property outside the subcontractor’s scope of work, the insurer had a duty to defend the subcontractor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ashley L. Cooper, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Cooper may be contacted at alc@sdvlaw.com