BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home expert witness Minto Alaska condominium expert witness Minto Alaska landscaping construction expert witness Minto Alaska townhome construction expert witness Minto Alaska structural steel construction expert witness Minto Alaska custom homes expert witness Minto Alaska industrial building expert witness Minto Alaska low-income housing expert witness Minto Alaska tract home expert witness Minto Alaska parking structure expert witness Minto Alaska concrete tilt-up expert witness Minto Alaska casino resort expert witness Minto Alaska hospital construction expert witness Minto Alaska retail construction expert witness Minto Alaska institutional building expert witness Minto Alaska Medical building expert witness Minto Alaska Subterranean parking expert witness Minto Alaska mid-rise construction expert witness Minto Alaska high-rise construction expert witness Minto Alaska office building expert witness Minto Alaska housing expert witness Minto Alaska production housing expert witness Minto Alaska
    Minto Alaska building consultant expertMinto Alaska architecture expert witnessMinto Alaska architectural engineering expert witnessMinto Alaska concrete expert witnessMinto Alaska architect expert witnessMinto Alaska delay claim expert witnessMinto Alaska consulting engineers
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Minto, 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 Minto 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

    Minto Alaska Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Minto Alaska Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Minto Alaska Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Minto Alaska Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Minto Alaska Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Minto Alaska Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Minto Alaska Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Minto Alaska


    Columbus, Ohio’s Tallest Building to be Inspected for Construction Defects

    Tarriffs, a Pandemic and War: Construction Contracts Must Withstand the Unforeseeable

    Following My Own Advice

    Federal District Court Finds Coverage Barred Because of Lack of Allegations of Damage During the Policy Period and Because of Late Notice

    Chinese Hunt for Trophy Properties Boosts NYC, London Prices

    Construction Contractor “Mean Tweets” Edition

    What Is the Independent Tort Doctrine? New Case Explains…

    Construction Jobs Keep Rising, with April Gain of 33,000

    The Importance of a Notice of Completion to Contractors, Subcontractors and Suppliers

    “A No-Lose Proposition?”

    Speculative Luxury Homebuilding on the Rise

    Doctrine of Substantial Performance When It Comes to Payment

    #4 CDJ Topic: Vita Planning and Landscape Architecture, Inc. v. HKS Architects, Inc.

    Power & Energy - Emerging Insurance Coverage Cases of Interest

    Toll Brothers Report End of Year Results

    Traub Lieberman Partner Colleen Hastie Wins Summary Judgment in Favor of Sub-Contracted Electrical Company

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

    Sometimes a General Damages Assessment is Enough. . .

    Pulte Home Corp. v. CBR Electric, Inc.

    A Deep Dive Into an Undervalued Urban Marvel

    County Elects Not to Sue Over Construction Defect Claims

    New Executive Order Prohibits Federal Contractors from Engaging in DEI Through Employment and Procurement Activities

    Construction Defect Notice in the Mailbox? Respond Appropriately

    Lien Actions Versus Lien Foreclosure Actions

    “If It Walks Like A Duck . . .” – Expert Testimony Not Always Required In Realtor Malpractice Cases Where Alleged Breach Of Duty Can Be Easily Understood By Lay Persons

    Rancosky Adopts Terletsky: Pennsylvania Supreme Court Sets Standard for Statutory Bad Faith Claims

    E-Commerce Logistics Test Limits of Tilt-Up Construction

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (6/26/24) – Construction Growth in Office and Data Center Sectors, Slight Ease in Consumer Price Index and Increased Premiums for Commercial Buildings

    Pa. Contractor Pleads No Contest to Prevailing-Wage Charges, Pays Workers $20.7M

    To Bee or Not to Bee - CA Court Finds Denial of Coverage Based on Exclusion was Premature Where Facts had not been Judicially Determined

    Sanibel Causeway Repair: Contractors Flooded Site With Crews, Resources

    New Jersey Condominium Owners Sue FEMA

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Sudden Death”

    When Cyber Crooks Steal Payments, Think Insurance Makes Up The Loss? Think Again.

    Bad Faith and a Partial Summary Judgment in Seattle Construction Defect Case

    Colorado Legislature Considering Making it Easier to Prevail on CCPA Claims

    ICE Said to Seek Mortgage Role Through Talks With Data Service

    Construction Slow to Begin in Superstorm Sandy Cases

    School Board Sues Multiple Firms over Site Excavation Problem

    Scientists found a way to make Cement Greener

    The Evolution of Construction Defect Trends at West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Cleveland Condo Board Says Construction Defects Caused Leaks

    How to Prepare for Potential Construction Disputes Resulting From COVID-19

    TRI Pointe Merges with Weyerhaeuser’s Real Estate Company

    Reasonableness of Liquidated Damages Determined at Time of Contract (or, You Can’t Look Back Again)

    Delaware Settlements with Minors and the Uniform Transfer to Minor Act

    Seattle’s Residential Zoning Transformation: What Property Owners, Buyers, and Investors Should Understand

    An Oregon School District Files Suit Against Robinson Construction Co.

    Address 'Your Work' Exposure Within CPrL Policies With Faulty Workmanship Coverage

    KF-103 v. American Family Mutual Insurance: An Exception to the Four Corners Rule
    Corporate Profile

    MINTO ALASKA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Minto, Alaska Construction Expert Witness Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Minto's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Minto, Alaska

    Greg Katz Quoted in Insurance Journal Article About How Big Data & AI Are Driving Up Verdicts, Settlements

    October 06, 2026 —
    National Managing Partner Greg Katz was recently quoted in an Insurance Journal article about how plaintiff's lawyers are harnessing big data and artificial intelligence to attempt to drive up jury awards and settlement demands. The article, titled "The Big Data/AI ‘Revolution’ Is Driving Up Verdicts, Settlements as Plaintiffs Buy In," points out that a growing number of personal injury and claims law firms, some of which are working with an influx of cash from investors and litigation funders, are using a multitude of high-tech tools to try to gain an advantage in litigation. They are using large online mock juries to test legal theories, big data to find sympathetic jurors and venues in which to try cases, and AI programs to analyze their own arguments and those of opponents. “They’re taking instincts and intuition out of the equation,” Mr. Katz told Insurance Journal. “They think they’ve come up with a different way to ring the bell and, in their words, add zeroes to awards.” Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Texas Adopts New Procedural Rules for Summary Judgment Motions: What You Need To Know

    July 13, 2026 —
    On March 1, 2026, sweeping amendments to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 166a took effect, fundamentally changing how Texas courts handle summary judgment motions — from filing and briefing through disposition. Whether representing a plaintiff or defendant, Texas litigants and attorneys must understand these new rules and their impact on case strategy and timelines. These procedural changes carry particular significance for construction litigants. Background: The Prior Rule Texas summary judgment practice has long diverged from the federal model. The Texas Rules of Civil Procedure recognize two types of summary judgment motions: (1) the traditional motion for summary judgment, and (2) the “no-evidence” motion for summary judgment. The no-evidence motion — unique to Texas — may be filed only after adequate time for discovery has passed. No bright-line rule governs that determination; it depends on the unique circumstances of each case. Reprinted courtesy of Conor G. Bateman, Snell & Wilmer and Marsha Cotton, Snell & Wilmer Mr. Bateman may be contacted at cbateman@swlaw.com Ms. Cotton may be contacted at mcotton@swlaw.com Read the full story...

    Introducing the Updated 2026 Pillsbury Guide to Data Centers

    June 08, 2026 —
    Since the initial publication of the Pillsbury Guide to Data Centers in 2025, the market has continued to evolve—most notably with respect to power availability, energy strategy, tax and incentives planning, and investment activity across the sector. While many of the legal, commercial and regulatory frameworks addressed in the original Guide remain durable and relevant, recent developments warranted targeted updates and additions. The 2026 edition expands and updates our energy-focused content to reflect the increasingly central role of power procurement, interconnection and long-term energy strategy in data center development. We have incorporated new materials addressing power purchase and interconnection agreements, solar and other renewable energy solutions, advanced reactor designs, and nuclear-powered data centers projects, including an updated project tracker. We have also added new analysis covering state and local tax considerations and incentive structures relevant to data center development and operations, as well as current M&A and private equity trends shaping investment in the sector. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gravel2Gavel Team

    The Grenfell & Champlain Towers: Risk Management Considerations in the Wake of Catastrophic Loss — A UK/US Comparison

    June 02, 2026 —
    1. Introduction As part of the multinational collaborative relationship between Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Fenchurch Law, we continually find ourselves in conversations about the sometimes subtle but sometimes drastic differences between risk management and coverage considerations from one country to the next. These differences are often highlighted by the fallout from large catastrophic losses that are widely publicized and illuminate sometimes widespread risks and perils that many others may be facing in the coming years. The response of governments and their subdivisions to the needs of victims and/or commercial parties, and insurance markets’ evaluation of and reactions to catastrophic losses vary widely from country to country and jurisdiction. In this article, we discuss these responses and reactions in the cases of the Grenfell Tower Fire in London, England, and the Champlain Tower collapse in Surfside, Florida, within the United States. These two widely publicized losses involved different risk management and insurance considerations based on where they occurred. They also saw substantially different government responses and raised varied questions about what the next steps are for their respective commercial and insurance markets. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Eric M. Clarkson, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Clarkson may be contacted at EClarkson@sdvlaw.com

    Lewis Brisbois Welcomes Clients and Community Leaders to New Garden City Office Opening

    July 27, 2026 —
    On July 15, Lewis Brisbois hosted a ribbon-cutting event for its new Garden City office, which opened in April to serve the Long Island community and beyond. The event was attended by more than 100 people, including Lewis Brisbois attorneys and staff as well as clients, local business and government leaders, Nassau County Supreme Court judges, and members of the press. Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman delivered remarks and cut the ribbon for the office. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Insured General Contractor Prevails on Motion for Summary Judgment to Establish Builder’s Risk Coverage

    July 06, 2026 —
    The general contractor’s motion for partial summary judgment successfully established that damage to footings in place before the policy period was covered after the collapse of a building. Big D Builders, Inc. v. Am Zurich Ins. Co., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72012 (D. Idaho March 31, 2026). Big D was the general contractor for building a new airplane hangar by erecting a 38,000 square foot structure. Before Big D began construction, the site of the hangar did not contain any pre-existing structures or buildings. Before completion of the hangar, it collapsed and caused extensive property damage. The builder’s risk policy issued by Zurich covered certain aspects of the construction project for the policy period December 28, 2023, to December 28, 2024. Zurich accepted coverage for most of the damage but not for damage to footings and columns installed prior to the start date of the policy. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Congratulations to Gianna Liddy on Her Promotion to Partner

    September 21, 2026 —
    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP is proud to announce that Gianna Liddy has been promoted to partner. Gianna’s dedication, leadership, and exceptional contributions to the firm have earned her this well-deserved recognition. Please join us in congratulating her on this exciting achievement! Meet Gianna Liddy! Gianna has been with BWB&O since 2019 and has been practicing law since 2017. Her practice focuses on complex civil defense litigation, including high-exposure personal injury, premises liability, transportation, construction defect, habitability, and general liability matters. As a Supervising Attorney in the firm’s Encinitas office, she oversees a team of attorneys, collaborates closely with clients and insurance professionals, and develops litigation strategy in complex matters. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP

    Differing Site Conditions Claim Requires a Misrepresentation

    May 14, 2026 —
    If you are entertaining a differing site conditions claim, consider this Third District Court of Appeals case from the mid-90s. In Hendry Corp. v. Metropolitan Dade County, 648 So.2d 140 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995), a contractor was hired by Dade County to demolish the old Rickenbacker Causeway in Miami. The original 1941 plans of the causeway were made available to contractors. The lowest bidding contractor that was awarded the project based its bid “on its conclusion that the pilings supporting the old bridge were made of concrete.” Hendry, supra at 141. The contractor based this conclusion on the original plans, its visual observation, and experience. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com