• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia parking structure expert witness Ashburn Virginia concrete tilt-up expert witness Ashburn Virginia Subterranean parking expert witness Ashburn Virginia structural steel construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia landscaping construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia mid-rise construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia industrial building expert witness Ashburn Virginia institutional building expert witness Ashburn Virginia production housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia multi family housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia townhome construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia custom home expert witness Ashburn Virginia tract home expert witness Ashburn Virginia casino resort expert witness Ashburn Virginia low-income housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia office building expert witness Ashburn Virginia hospital construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia custom homes expert witness Ashburn Virginia Medical building expert witness Ashburn Virginia condominiums expert witness Ashburn Virginia
    Ashburn Virginia construction claims expert witnessAshburn Virginia building expertAshburn Virginia construction project management expert witnessAshburn Virginia roofing and waterproofing expert witnessAshburn Virginia structural concrete expertAshburn Virginia construction cost estimating expert witnessAshburn Virginia architect 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

    Insurance Law Client Alert: California Appeals Court Refuses to Apply Professional Services Exclusion to Products-Completed Operations Loss

    Century Communities Acquires Dunhill Homes Las Vegas Operations

    Wall Enclosing Georgia Neighborhood Built for Walking Dead TV Show

    Washington School District Sues Construction Company Over Water Pipe Damage

    A Subcontractor’s Perspective On California’s Recent Changes to Indemnity Provisions

    The Dog Ate My Exclusion! – Georgia Federal Court: No Reformation to Add Pollution Exclusion

    Damron Agreement Questioned in Colorado Casualty Insurance v Safety Control Company, et al.

    MGM Begins Dismantling of the Las Vegas Harmon Tower

    Colorado House Bill 1279 Stalls over 120-day Unit Owner Election Period

    Man Pleads Guilty in Construction Kickback Scheme

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

    Tenth Circuit Finds Insurer Must Defend Unintentional Faulty Workmanship

    Microsoft Said to Weigh Multibillion-Dollar Headquarters Revamp

    Commonwealth Court Holds That Award of Attorney's Fees and Penalties is Mandatory Under the Procurement Code Upon a Finding of Bad Faith

    2018 Legislative Changes Affecting the Construction Industry

    Building Down in November, Even While Home Sales Rise

    Insurer Able to Refuse Coverage for Failed Retaining Wall

    Australian Developer Denies Building Problems Due to Construction Defects

    Additional Insured Prevails on Summary Judgment For Duty to Defend, Indemnify

    $24 Million Verdict Against Material Supplier Overturned Where Plaintiff Failed to Prove Supplier’s Negligence or Breach of Contract Caused an SB800 Violation

    Maryland Court Affirms Condo Association’s Right to Sue for Construction Defects

    Gillotti v. Stewart (2017) 2017 WL 1488711 Rejects Liberty Mutual, Holding Once Again that the Right to Repair Act is the Exclusive Remedy for Construction Defect Claims

    No Coverage for Tenant's Breach of Contract Claims

    Thank Your Founding Fathers for Mechanic’s Liens

    Coverage, Bad Faith Upheld In Construction Defect Case

    The Road to Hell is Paved with Good Intentions: A.B. 1701’s Requirement that General Contractors Pay Subcontractor Employee Wages Will Do More Harm Than Good

    The Job is Substantially Complete, the Subcontract was Never Signed, the Subcontractor Wants to be Paid—Now What?

    Tidal Lagoon Plans Marine Project to Power Every Home in Wales

    Contract Change #8: Direct Communications between Owners and Contractors (law note)

    The Future of Construction Defects in Utah Unclear

    David M. McLain named Law Week Colorado’s 2015 Barrister’s Best Construction Defects Lawyer for Defendants

    California Supreme Court Finds that When it Comes to Intentional Interference Claims, Public Works Projects are Just Different, Special Even

    Lakewood Introduced City Ordinance to Battle Colorado’s CD Law

    CDJ’s #3 Topic of the Year: Burch v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles County, 223 Cal.App.4th 1411 (2014)

    How the Election Could Affect the Housing Industry: Steven Cvitanovic Authors Construction Today Article

    As Recovery Continues, Home Improvement Stores Make Sales

    Insurance Attorney Gary Barrera Joins Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group

    Pool Contractor’s Assets Frozen over Construction Claims

    The “Program Accessibility” Exception for Public Entities Under the ADA

    Property Damage, Occurrences, Delays, Offsets and Fees. California Decision is a Smorgasbord of Construction Insurance Issues

    Make Prudent Decisions regarding your Hurricane Irma Property Damage Claims

    Firm Announces Remediation of Defective Drywall

    Court of Appeal Opens Pandora’s Box on Definition of “Contractor” for Forum Selection Clauses

    No Additional Insured Coverage for Subcontractor's Work Outside Policy Period

    Waiving Workers’ Compensation Immunity for Indemnity: Demystifying a Common and Scary-Looking Contract Term

    Pollution Exclusion Prevents Coverage for Injury Caused by Insulation

    Construction Spending Highest Since April 2009

    S&P Near $1 Billion Mortgage Ratings Settlement With U.S.

    Practical Advice: Indemnification and Additional Insured Issues Revisited

    Modified Plan Unveiled for Chicago's Sixth-Tallest Tower
    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. Drawing 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

    “Positive Limiting Barriers” Are An Open and Obvious Condition, Relieving Owner of Duty to Warn

    June 13, 2018 —
    On June 1, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit decided the case of Potvin v. Speedway, Inc., a personal injury case subject to the laws of Massachusetts. In Massachusetts, environmental rules require the installation of “positive limiting barriers” at gasoline service stations to contain gasoline spills of up to 5 gallons. At a self-service station now owned by Speedway, Inc., the plaintiff, a passenger in a car being serviced, exited the car but tripped on these barriers and was injured. She sued Speedway in state court, and the case was removed to federal court. 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

    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

    First-Time Homebuyers Make Biggest Share of Deals in 17 Years

    February 22, 2018 —
    Millennials are playing homeownership catch-up. First-time buyers rushed into the market last year, making 38 percent of all U.S. single-family home purchases, the biggest share since 2000, data released Thursday by Genworth Mortgage Insurance show. The 2.07 million new or existing homes bought by first-timers was 7 percent more than in 2016, according to the insurer, part of Genworth Financial Inc. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Prashant Gopal, Bloomberg

    Finding Plaintiff Intentionally Spoliated Evidence, the Northern District of Indiana Imposes Sanction

    March 14, 2018 —
    On January 23, 2018, the Northern District of Indiana issued a decision that clarifies what constitutes spoliation of evidence under Indiana law. In Arcelormittal Ind. Harbor LLC v. Amex Nooter, LLC, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10141 (N.D. Ind.), the defendant filed a motion for sanctions, alleging that the plaintiff intentionally spoliated critical evidence. The defendant sought dismissal of the action, asserting that the plaintiff intentionally discarded and lost important physical evidence within hours of a fire that occurred while the defendant’s employees were performing work at its facility. The decision underscores the importance of taking immediate action to properly identify and secure potentially material evidence in order to satisfy ones duty to preserve pre-suit evidence and avoid any spoliation defenses and associated sanctions. In Arcelormittal, the court initially considered whether to apply state or federal law when analyzing a litigant’s duty to preserve pre-suit evidence and determine if that party committed spoliation. Since the case was brought in federal court based on diversity jurisdiction, the court held that Indiana state law governed the spoliation analysis. As noted by the court, under Indiana state law, “the intentional destruction, mutilation, altercation, or concealment of evidence” is considered to be spoliation. Thus, under Indiana law, a party who knew or should have known that litigation was imminent “may not lose, destroy or suppress material facts or evidence.” The plaintiff argued that Indiana law requires a showing of improper purpose or bad faith to establish that a litigant spoliated evidence. The Arcelormittal court rejected the plaintiff’s argument. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Shannon M. Warren, White and Williams LLP
    Ms. Warren may be contacted at

    Strict Rules for Home Remodel Contracts in California

    June 06, 2018 —
    Home remodeling in California is governed by strict contracting laws intended to protect consumers. The Contractors State Licensing Board, (“CSLB”) is particularly concerned about contractors working without permits, contractors taking payment in excess of the value of the work complete–including deposits in excess of $1,000–and contractors refusing to complete projects. They are also concerned about contractors who fail to comply with the Home Improvement Contract (“HIC”) laws. At a minimum, it takes six pages of contract language for an HIC to comply with California law. Most contractors do not get it right, leaving themselves exposed to license discipline, misdemeanor criminal prosecution, and void contracts. The stakes are high, and contractors are advised to learn and comply with the HIC laws. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel F. McLennon, Smith Currie
    Mr. McLennon may be contacted at

    Buffett’s $11 Million Beach House Is Still on the Market

    February 28, 2018 —
    Warren Buffett auctions a lunch date for charity every year, and the winning bid usually stretches to seven figures. He twice sold his used cars to fans for multiples of their Kelly Blue Book value. Someone once even paid more than $200,000 to purchase his old wallet. (It had a stock tip inside.) For those who venerate one of the world’s best investors, money is usually no object when buying a piece of the legend. A year ago, Buffett put his vacation home in Emerald Bay, a gated enclave next to Laguna Beach, Calif., up for sale. He bought the property in 1971 at the urging of his first wife, Susan, for $150,000—the equivalent of a bit less than $1 million today. At the time, he didn’t think of it much as an investment, he told the Wall Street Journal last year. Laguna was less developed back then, more surfer-and-hippie paradise than multimillionaire’s haunt. The couple and their family often spent summers at the home, as well as time around Christmas, when Buffett would hole up in the master bedroom working on his closely followed annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway Inc. shareholders. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Noah Buhayar, Bloomberg

    Triggering Duty to Advance Costs Same Standard as Duty to Defend

    April 11, 2018 —
    Interpreting Hawaii law, the federal district court held that the standard for triggering the duty to defend is the same as the standard for the duty to advance costs under a D&O policy. Maui Land & Pineapple Co. v. Liberty Ins. Underwriters, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56949 (D. Haw. April 3, 2018). The underlying plaintiffs sued 22 defendants, including Maui Land Pineapple (MLP) and Ryan L. Churchill, concerning a residential development project known as The Ritz-Carlton Club & Residences. The underlying complaint alleged that MLP "directly or indirectly through wholly owned subsidiaries exerts control" over Kapalua Bay, LLC, the defendant in the underlying lawsuit. Kapalua Bay, LLC was created as a joint venture of which MLP held 51%. Churchill was a senior executive officer of MLP, President of Kapalua Bay, and an executive officer of Kapalua Realty, which participated in all aspects of the Project, such as financing, development, and construction. In their second amended complaint, the underlying plaintiffs alleged nine Counts against the defendants, including breach of fiduciary duty. It was alleged that defendants were not transparent and kept owners in the dark regarding the status of the project. Several allegations named Churchill individually and described his alleged material misrepresentations to the underlying plaintiffs regarding the project's financing. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at

    Statutory Bad Faith and an Insured’s 60 Day Notice to Cure

    April 11, 2018 —
    A recent case came out in favor of an insured and against a first-party property insurer in the triggering of a statutory bad faith action. Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal in Demase v. State Farm Florida Insurance Company, 43 Fla. L. Weekly D679a (Fla. 5th DCA 2018) held that if an insurer pays a claim after the 60-day notice to cure period provided by Florida Statute s. 624.155(3), this “constitutes a determination of an insurer’s liability for coverage and extent of damages under section 624.155(1)(b) even when there is no underlying action.Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at