BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    townhome construction expert witness Greenwood Indiana office building expert witness Greenwood Indiana condominium expert witness Greenwood Indiana Medical building expert witness Greenwood Indiana Subterranean parking expert witness Greenwood Indiana institutional building expert witness Greenwood Indiana mid-rise construction expert witness Greenwood Indiana concrete tilt-up expert witness Greenwood Indiana low-income housing expert witness Greenwood Indiana parking structure expert witness Greenwood Indiana condominiums expert witness Greenwood Indiana tract home expert witness Greenwood Indiana landscaping construction expert witness Greenwood Indiana casino resort expert witness Greenwood Indiana production housing expert witness Greenwood Indiana housing expert witness Greenwood Indiana retail construction expert witness Greenwood Indiana custom home expert witness Greenwood Indiana industrial building expert witness Greenwood Indiana hospital construction expert witness Greenwood Indiana high-rise construction expert witness Greenwood Indiana custom homes expert witness Greenwood Indiana
    Greenwood Indiana structural engineering expert witnessesGreenwood Indiana expert witnesses fenestrationGreenwood Indiana testifying construction expert witnessGreenwood Indiana architect expert witnessGreenwood Indiana construction code expert witnessGreenwood Indiana slope failure expert witnessGreenwood Indiana building consultant expert
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Greenwood, Indiana

    Indiana Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: According to SB45160, §IC 32-27-3-1&2 a claimant must provide written notice 60 days before filing an action. Within 21 days after service of the notice, the construction professional must serve a written response. Claimant must file list of known construction defects, description, and the construction professional responsible for each alleged defect (to the extent known).


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Greenwood Indiana

    License required for plumbing. All other licensing is done at the local county level.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Madison County Chapter
    Local # 1504
    853 E. Southern Avenue
    Indianapolis, IN 46203
    Greenwood Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Builders Association of Greater Indianapolis
    Local # 1544
    PO Box 44670
    Indianapolis, IN 46244

    Greenwood Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Indiana Builders Association
    Local # 1500
    101 W Ohio St Ste 1111
    Indianapolis, IN 46204

    Greenwood Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Wayne County Builders Association
    Local # 1570
    PO Box 1591
    Richmond, IN 47375

    Greenwood Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Gtr Terre Haute
    Local # 1582
    2747 Sidenbender Rd
    Terre Haute, IN 47802

    Greenwood Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Southeastern Indiana chapter
    Local # 1536
    394 W County Road 400 N
    Greensburg, IN 47240
    Greenwood Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Henry County Chapter
    Local # 1598
    PO Box 925
    New Castle, IN 47362
    Greenwood Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Greenwood Indiana


    Celebrating BWB&O’s 2026 Super Lawyers Rising Stars in San Diego!

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Failure to Cover Collapse Fails

    Construction Defects Uncertain Role in Coverage in Pennsylvania

    Legal Risks of Green Building

    The Value of Photographic Evidence in Construction Litigation

    The “Unavailability Exception” is Unavailable to Policyholders, According to New York Court of Appeals

    Shifting Fees and Costs in Nevada Construction Defect Cases

    Massive Redesign Turns Newark Airport Terminal Into a Foodie Theme Park

    One Insurer's Settlement with Insured Does Not Bar Contribution Claim by Other Insurers

    Developer Pre-Conditions in CC&Rs Limiting Ability of HOA to Make Construction Defect Claims, Found Unenforceable

    What Makes a Great Lawyer?

    Colorado Trench Collapse Kills Two

    Builders Oppose Senate Housing Bill Over Investor Ban Provision

    Asbestos Confirmed After New York City Steam Pipe Blast

    The Secret to Success Is Doing Things a Little Bit Differently

    Boston Tower Project to Create 450 Jobs

    Protecting and Perfecting Your Mechanics Lien when the Property Owner Files Bankruptcy

    He Turned Wall Street Offices Into Homes. Now He Vows to Remake New York

    Construction Termination Issues Part 5: What if You are the One that Wants to Quit?

    Cracked Girders Trigger Scrutiny of Salesforce Transit Center's Entire Structure

    Cause Still Unclear in March Retaining Wall Collapse on $900M NJ Interchange

    Court of Appeals Rules that HOA Lien is not Spurious, Despite Claim that Annexation was Invalid

    How Data Drives the Future of Design

    Substitutions On a Construction Project — A Specification Writer Responds

    Court Resolves Disagreement on the Amount of the Deductible

    Avoiding Wage Claims in California Construction

    Colorado’s New Construction Defect Law Takes Effect in September: What You Need to Know

    School Board Sues Multiple Firms over Site Excavation Problem

    New California "Construction" Legislation

    Moving in Before Substantial Completion? The Risks of Early Owner Occupancy

    DA’s Office Checking Workers Comp Compliance

    Residential Contractors, Be Sure to Have these Clauses in Your Contracts

    Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series, Part 2: Coverage for Smoke-Related Damages

    No Bad Faith in Insurer's Denial of Collapse Claim

    ‘Hallelujah,’ House Finally Approves $1T Infrastructure Funding Package

    Construction Firm Settles Suit Over 2012 Calif. Wildfire

    Court of Appeals Affirms Dismissal of Owner’s Claims Based on Contractual One-Year Claims Limitations Period

    Federal Contractors Should Request Debriefings As A Matter Of Course

    Is a Violation of a COVID-19 Order the Basis For Civil Liability?

    Structuring Water Resilience for Data Center Development: Water Rights, Reuse Incentives, and Emerging Disclosure Risk

    Atlanta Office Wins Defense Verdict For Property Manager On Claims By Vendor, Cross-Claims By Property Owner

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Just Hanging Around”

    Negligence Against a Construction Manager Agent

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

    Yellen Has Scant Power to Relieve U.S. Housing Slowdown

    The Hidden Dangers of Construction Defect Litigation

    Contrasting Expert Opinions Result in Denial of Cross Motions for Summary Judgment

    Court Finds Duty To Defend Environmental Claim, But Defense Limited to $100,000

    James R. Lynch Appointed to the Washington State Capital Project Review Committee

    Arizona Court of Appeals Clarifies Homeowners Association Open Meeting Requirements
    Corporate Profile

    GREENWOOD INDIANA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Greenwood, Indiana Construction Expert Witness Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Greenwood, Indiana

    “The Superintendent Told Us to Do It:” Why Verbal Approval May Not Be Enough

    June 02, 2026 —
    In construction defect litigation, one scenario appears repeatedly: a subcontractor installs work in a manner that differs from the plans, specifications, manufacturer instructions, or industry standards after being verbally directed to do so by the general contractor, superintendent, architect, or owner’s representative. At the time, the decision may seem minor. The project is moving quickly, the field team wants to maintain progress, and nobody wants to stop working over what appears to be a small issue. The subcontractor may trust the superintendent or project manager and assume the conversation will be remembered later if questions arise. Years later, however, when the project experiences problems, the people involved may deny the conversation occurred, remember it differently, or simply no longer remember the project. Without written documentation, the subcontractor can find itself defending claims for defective work, even though it performed the installation exactly as directed. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Andrew Lintner, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. Lintner may be contacted at alintner@hhmrlaw.com

    When Rule 702 Motions Fail: A Close Look at AECOM v. Flatiron

    February 02, 2026 —
    In AECOM Tech. Servs., Inc. v. Flatiron | AECOM, LLC, 2024 WL 22640 (D. Colo. 2024), the United States District Court for the District of Colorado addressed when expert testimony is not subject to be limited or excluded pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 702. Background In 2015, AECOM Technical Services, Inc. (“AECOM”) and Flatiron | AECOM, LLC (“Flatiron”) entered into an agreement, in which they agreed to work together to assemble a design/build team for the purposes of submitting a proposal to the Colorado Department of Transportation’s (“CDOT”) construction project known as C-470 Tolled Express Lanes Segment 1 Design-Build Project (the “Project”). AECOM provided the design and engineering services, and Flatiron submitted the proposal to CDOT. On or about June 16, 2016, CDOT awarded Flatiron the Project. Flatiron later claimed that AECOM’s design failed to follow basic engineering and project requirements. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC

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

    April 27, 2026 —
    On March 26, 2026, President Trump signed Executive Order 14398, entitled Addressing DEI Discrimination by Federal Contractors, requiring federal agencies to add contractual language in all federal contracts prohibiting contractors and subcontractors from engaging in any racially discriminatory DEI activities, as defined by the Executive Order (EO). While this EO includes language similar to prior DEI-related orders, it introduces a significant expansion in enforcement by subjecting non-compliant contractors to liability under the False Claims Act (FCA), including exposure to whistleblower actions and qui tam litigation. A qui tam claim is a civil action by a private individual on behalf of the government alleging fraud against federal programs and seeking to recover damages. The new EO states that involvement in any racially discriminatory DEI activities is not only unethical and illegal, but also deemed fraudulent against federal programs because it is material to the government’s payment decisions. The definition of DEI activities here matters, as this EO expands a contractor’s obligations beyond the management of its employment policies and includes prohibitions against funding or expending time or resources on DEI activities and contracting with subcontractors, vendors, or suppliers utilizing DEI programs. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Laura De Santos, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani
    Ms. De Santos may be contacted at ldesantos@grsm.com

    U.S. Supreme Court Decision Alters Course of $745M Louisiana Coastal Damage Judgment

    June 15, 2026 —
    The U.S. Supreme Court has issued a unanimous decision allowing oil and gas companies to move Louisiana coastal erosion lawsuits from state court to federal court under the federal officer removal statute. While the ruling is procedural, it carries significant implications for environmental- and energy-related risks. The case, Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana, Slip Op. 24-813 (April 17, 2026), addressed a threshold jurisdictional question but has broader significance for environmental and climate related litigation. State courts are often viewed as more favorable forums for plaintiffs asserting environmental damage claims, particularly those brought by governmental entities. The opinion issued on April 17, 2026 is the latest development in long-running Louisiana coastal litigation that began more than a decade ago. Starting in 2013, Louisiana parishes filed 42 lawsuits against oil and gas companies alleging environmental damage related to historic oil field operations. The parishes alleged that oil and gas companies violated state coastal management laws by failing to properly restore impacted areas. Chevron sought to remove the cases from state court under 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1), known as federal officer removal, which provides federal jurisdiction over “any person acting under [an] officer” of the United States "for or relating to any act under color of such office." The Fifth Circuit rejected the argument and remanded the case, and others like it, to state court. Trial began in March 2025 in Point à la Hache, Louisiana. On April 4, 2025, the jury awarded a total of $745 million to compensate for land loss, contamination and abandoned equipment. On June 16, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review the question of whether a federal contractor can remove to federal court when sued for oil-production activities undertaken to fulfill a federal oil-refinement contract. Reprinted courtesy of Jennifer Kretschmann, Lewis Brisbois and Jennifer E. Michel, Lewis Brisbois Ms. Kretschmann may be contacted at Jennifer.Kretschmann@lewisbrisbois.com Ms. Michel may be contacted at Jenny.Michel@lewisbrisbois.com Read the full story...

    If You Get ‘Reported to the Board’ for Your Professional License (Law Note)

    January 21, 2026 —
    The NC Board of Architecture and the NC Board of Examiners for Engineers and Surveyors (as well as other Boards, including the NC Licensing Board for General Contractors) have grievance procedures in which anyone – client or not—can file a grievance against you. That’s the bad news. The good news is that the Boards have seen it all before, and if the grievance is someone unhappy about a bill, or using the process to harass you for unfounded reasons, they will recognize those complaints for what they are. HOWEVER, this does not mean that you should treat any grievance, no matter how unfounded, lightly. The first thing you need to do is contact your insurance broker/agent and report the matter. Often times, your insurance carrier will hire an attorney (someone like me) to defend you free of charge (at least up to a certain dollar amount). This is part of your insurance coverage, and you should take full advantage of it. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett PLLC
    Ms. Brumback may be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com

    When Your Scheduler Hallucinates: Managing AI Risk on the Job Site

    March 03, 2026 —
    Artificial intelligence has moved from the conference room to the construction site. Contractors are using AI-powered tools to predict schedule delays, monitor safety through drone footage, optimize equipment maintenance and flag potential hazards in real time. These tools deliver genuine efficiency gains, but they also introduce risks that most construction contracts do not anticipate and many project teams aren’t yet equipped to manage. The problem is that AI tools are probabilistic and not determinative, meaning that they can “hallucinate”: generating confident, but completely wrong, information. Your AI scheduling software might therefore predict a delay that never materializes, causing unnecessary resource mobilization. Your drone monitoring might flag a nonexistent safety hazard, stopping work and costing productivity. Or worse, it might miss a real hazard entirely. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason Loring, Jones Walker LLP
    Mr. Loring may be contacted at jloring@joneswalker.com

    Five Payne & Fears Attorneys Named 2026 Southern California Super Lawyers

    March 10, 2026 —
    Five Payne & Fears attorneys have been named to the 2026 Southern California Super Lawyers list in recognition of their work across a range of practice areas. This honor reflects their dedication to their clients, depth of experience, and the high standard of service they bring to every matter. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Payne & Fears LLP

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (3/18/25) – Data Center Frenzy, China’s Expanding REIT Market and Tariff-Affected Construction Costs

    March 31, 2026 —
    In our latest roundup, relistings reached highest total in a decade, Florida State Legislature passes bill to increase the state’s housing supply, data center construction adapts to changes and more!
    • The data center construction frenzy and a new, potentially larger highway bill were top of mind for builders during the latest round of contractor earnings calls and financial reports. (Joe Bousquin, Construction Dive)
    • Tariffs and associated policy uncertainty have increased construction costs and delayed leasing and investment choices. (J.P. Morgan)
    • Relistings hit the highest January figure since Redfin began tracking this metric a decade ago. (Diana Olick, CNBC).
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team