BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction expert witness Camden County North Carolina retail construction expert witness Camden County North Carolina condominiums expert witness Camden County North Carolina parking structure expert witness Camden County North Carolina tract home expert witness Camden County North Carolina custom homes expert witness Camden County North Carolina housing expert witness Camden County North Carolina Medical building expert witness Camden County North Carolina townhome construction expert witness Camden County North Carolina low-income housing expert witness Camden County North Carolina mid-rise construction expert witness Camden County North Carolina multi family housing expert witness Camden County North Carolina institutional building expert witness Camden County North Carolina office building expert witness Camden County North Carolina condominium expert witness Camden County North Carolina structural steel construction expert witness Camden County North Carolina casino resort expert witness Camden County North Carolina industrial building expert witness Camden County North Carolina production housing expert witness Camden County North Carolina custom home expert witness Camden County North Carolina Subterranean parking expert witness Camden County North Carolina hospital construction expert witness Camden County North Carolina
    Camden County North Carolina construction forensic expert witnessCamden County North Carolina delay claim expert witnessCamden County North Carolina construction scheduling expert witnessCamden County North Carolina construction expert witnessesCamden County North Carolina building consultant expertCamden County North Carolina construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessCamden County North Carolina roofing construction expert
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Camden County, North Carolina

    North Carolina Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Case law precedent


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Camden County North Carolina

    A contractor's license is required for all jobs over $30,000.00. Separate boards license plumbing and electrical trades.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Vance Granville Home Builders Association
    Local # 3447
    PO Box 803
    Oxford, NC 27565

    Camden County North Carolina Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Surry Co. Home Builders Association
    Local # 3469
    3104 Ararat Road
    Ararat, NC 27007
    Camden County North Carolina Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Northeastern NC
    Local # 3454
    PO Box 59
    Aydlett, NC 27916
    Camden County North Carolina Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Ashe County Home Builders Association
    Local # 3408
    PO Box 1450
    Jefferson, NC 28640

    Camden County North Carolina Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Roxboro-Person Co Home Builders Association
    Local # 3464
    333 S Lamar Street
    Roxboro, NC 27573
    Camden County North Carolina Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Roanoke Valley Chapter
    Local # 3457
    PO Box 279
    Roanoke Rapids, NC 27870
    Camden County North Carolina Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Alleghany County Chapter
    Local # 3446
    PO Box 489
    Sparta, NC 28675

    Camden County North Carolina Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Camden County North Carolina


    See the Stories That Drew the Most Readers to ENR.com in 2023

    Cross-Motions for Partial Judgment on the Pleadings for COVID-19 Claim Denied

    Illinois Supreme Court Finds Construction Defect Claim Triggers Initial Grant of Coverage

    Wyoming Supreme Court Picks a Side After Reviewing the Sutton Rule

    U.K. Developer Pledges Building Safety in Wake of Grenfell

    Toronto Contractor Bondfield Wins Court Protection as Project Woes Mount

    Insureds' Not Entitled to Recovery for Partial Collapse

    Victoria Kajo Named One of KNOW Women's 100 Women to KNOW in America for 2024

    Additional Insured Status Survives Summary Judgment Stage

    Include Contract Clauses for Protection Against Ever-Evolving Construction Challenges

    Third Circuit Holds That Duty to Indemnify "Follows" Duty to Defend

    No Interlocutory Appeals of "Garden-Variety" Contract Disputes

    2018 Legislative Changes Affecting the Construction Industry

    Insurer Must Defend Claims of Negligence and Private Nuisance

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

    Equitable Subrogation Part Deux: Mechanic’s Lien vs. Later Bank Deed of Trust

    Protect Projects From Higher Repair Costs and Property Damage

    Insured's Failure to Prove Entire Collapse of Building Leads to Dismissal

    EEOC Issues Anti-Harassment Guidance To Construction-Industry Employers

    NEW DEFECT WARRANTY LAWS – Now Applicable to Condominiums and HOAs transitioning from Developer to Homeowner Control. Is Your Community Aware of its Rights Under the New Laws?

    Will On-Site Robotics Become Feasible in Construction?

    Arctic Roads and Runways Face the Prospect of Rapid Decline

    The Future of Construction Defects in Utah Unclear

    Landmark Montana Supreme Court Decision Series: The Duty to Defend

    Top 10 Insurance Cases of 2024

    Remote Depositions in the Post-Covid-19 World

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2026 Illinois Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars

    Design Immunity of Public Entities: Sometimes Designs, Like Recipes, are Best Left Alone

    ¡AI Caramba!

    Harsh New Time Limits on Construction Defect Claims

    Fire Fears After Grenfell Disaster Set Back Wood Building in UK

    Not So Unambiguous: California Court of Appeal Finds Coverage for Additional Insured

    Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court Holds that Nearly All Project Labor Agreements are Illegal

    Top Five Legal Mistakes in Construction

    What is Toxic Mold Litigation?

    The Construction Defect Litigation Podcast: Navigating Multi-Party Construction Defect Litigation

    Texas Supreme Court Finds Payment of Appraisal Award Does Not Absolve Insurer of Statutory Liability

    Daily Construction Reports: Don’t Leave the Job Without Them

    White House’s New Draft Guidance Limiting NEPA Review of Greenhouse Gas Impacts Is Not So New or Limiting

    Two Worthy Insurance Topics: (1) Bad Faith, And (2) Settling Without Insurer’s Consent

    What to do When the Worst Happens: Responding to a Cybersecurity Breach

    Voluntary Payments Affirmative Defense Does Not Apply in Contract Cases

    Arezoo Jamshidi Selected to the 2023 San Diego Super Lawyers List

    ABA’s Fundamentals of Construction Law, 3rd Edition

    Deadline for Hurricane Ian Disaster Recovery Applications Announced

    Land Use Team Wins Appeal for Affordable Senior Housing Development in San Francisco

    Restoring the USS Alabama: Surety Lessons From an 80-Year-Old Battleship

    Agreement Authorizing Party’s Own Engineer to Determine Substantial Compliance Found Binding on Adverse Party

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (7/23/25) – Builders Look for Startups, AI Transforms Real Estate and Interest Rates Stall Construction Momentum

    Want to Make Your Jobsite Safer? Look to the Skies.
    Corporate Profile

    CAMDEN COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Camden County, North Carolina Construction Expert Witness Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Camden County'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
    Camden County, North Carolina

    What Prevents Innovation in Construction from Taking Off

    September 15, 2026 —
    In construction, we have the knowledge, technology, and innovative people to radically improve our performance, yet we’re still stuck in old ways. Why is that? I attended an annual gathering for real estate and construction professionals at Rakennustieto Oy, Finland’s leading building information provider. The day before, a half-day seminar was held at the same venue. During both events, we discussed the need for change in the construction sector. Everyone agreed that we need to radically improve how we produce and share information. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (8/19/26) – Single-Family Housing Investors Worry, Confidence in Multifamily REITs and Construction Backlog Falls

    September 08, 2026 —
    In our latest roundup, U.S. Chamber of Commerce creates Housing Advisory Council, a legal battle develops over new federal rules related to mortgage escrow accounts, hospitality dealmakers pursue ‘bigger, higher-conviction’ M&A, and more!
    • In the wake of the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act becoming law, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has created a Housing Advisory Council with the goal of advancing market-driven policies that help increase housing supply and promote affordability. (Julie Strupp, Multifamily Dive)
    • Investors in the single-family housing market are increasingly concerned about interest rates, rising insurance and home costs, and the ongoing war with Iran. (Diana Olick, CNBC)
    • A legal battle is brewing over new federal rules related to accounts that hold money to pay homeowners’ property taxes and insurance payments. (Sarah Agostino, CNBC)
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Understanding the EPA’s Latest Proposed Drinking Water Contaminant Monitoring Rule, Published in Law360

    September 01, 2026 —
    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposed Sixth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 6) represents another step in the federal government’s ongoing effort to identify and evaluate emerging contaminants in drinking water. The proposal would require certain public water systems to monitor and report on 30 unregulated drinking water contaminants from 2028 through 2030, while generating occurrence data that could inform future regulation and affect environmental, commercial, litigation and risk assessments. In an article published by Law360, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani Senior Counsel, Ayodeji Ayolola, analyzes the scope and practical implications of UCMR 6, including the contaminants selected, the proposed monitoring requirements for public water systems, and the EPA’s continued focus on PFAS and related organofluorine compounds. The article also touches upon the potential significance of publicly available monitoring data for businesses and property stakeholders. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani

    A Permitting Base Checklist for Data Centers and Power Plants

    June 02, 2026 —
    There is a lot of talk these days about “license to operate” for data centers, meaning management of the relationships with stakeholders and broader communities concerning both the benefits and adverse consequences of locating a facility in a particular locale. Here, we are speaking of “license to operate” more literally—namely, the legal and regulatory permitting and approval requirements for a privately owned data center whether by itself or colocated with a power generating plant. Our Base Checklist includes generally and potentially applicable permitting requirements for development and operation, using California as an example. (Taking legal authority Frank Sinatra out of context, “If you can make it there, you can make it anywhere.”) The actual requirements for a given facility would depend, in part, on local law, including planning and zoning laws and plans, and the environment of the site. Just as examples, additional permitting and mitigation requirements might apply if sensitive receptors are located nearby (e.g., noise mitigation for residential dwellings), if sensitive and protected biological resources (e.g., jurisdictional waters and/or protected species) would be impacted, or if the present or former land uses require additional measures (e.g., hazardous materials remediation, mitigation for conversion of prime farmland, or protection of cultural resources). The scope of permit requirements would ultimately be determined by the applicable regulatory agencies and by the lead and responsible agencies under the applicable state environmental land use regime—in our reference case here, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. McDonough, Pillsbury, Stephen J. Humes, Pillsbury and Stacey C. Wright, Pillsbury Mr. McDonough may be contacted at michael.mcdonough@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Humes may be contacted at stephen.humes@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Wright may be contacted at stephen.humes@pillsburylaw.com Read the full story...

    GRSM Trial Team Holds Alameda County Asbestos Verdict to $900,000 Against $50 Million Demand

    July 27, 2026 —
    Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani Partners John Katerndahl and Vincent Gunter recently obtained an outstanding trial result for a manufacturer of asbestos-containing electrical cable, holding a jury verdict to $900,000 against a $50 million demand following an eight-week trial in Alameda County Superior Court, which is among the most challenging asbestos venues in the country. The GRSM team also included Associate Brandon Sanchez, on-site trial Paralegal Laura Vitanova, and Paralegal Kerrie Lease. The plaintiffs, the surviving spouse and four children of a former painter who died of mesothelioma, alleged that the decedent was exposed to asbestos from the company’s electrical cable during construction of a California nuclear power facility. GRSM’s client was the sole remaining defendant at trial. The plaintiffs asked the jury for $50 million and called 15 witnesses across their case-in-chief and rebuttal. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani

    Newark Team Obtains Appellate Ruling Affirming Summary Judgment for Lawyer and Firm in Professional Negligence Lawsuit

    April 14, 2026 —
    Newark Partner Meredith Kaplan Stoma and Associate Anthony Doss recently secured a decision from the New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division, affirming summary judgment for their clients, a lawyer and her firm, in a lawsuit alleging professional negligence in connection with the administration of a commercial loan. The circumstances giving rise to the lawsuit date back to September 2020, when the plaintiff was approached by members of a real estate investment company regarding a short-term loan opportunity whereby he would loan the company $200,000. The company provided the plaintiff with a “bridge loan package,” which stated that the requested funds would be held in the escrow account of their counsel and her firm (Lewis Brisbois’ clients), and returned to him with interest within six months once the company was “capitalized” by a senior lender. The company subsequently prepared two notes, each for $100,000, in connection with the agreement. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Insurer’s Federal Suit Dismissed in Favor of Insured’s State Suit

    April 14, 2026 —
    The federal district court granted the insured’s motion to dismiss the insurer’s federal suit for declaratory judgment because the insured filed a more complete action in state court. Church Mut. Ins. Co. v. Elmwood Baptist Church, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 259762 (S.D. W.V. Dec. 16, 2025). Elmwood purchased a property policy from Church Mutual Insurance Company. After the roof of Elmwood’s property collapsed, the parties disputed the amount Church Mutual owed to Elmwood. Church Mutual filed suit in federal district court asking for a declaration that the policy was “void ab initio,’ or, alternatively, that Church had fully compensated Elmwood for its loss. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Insurer Granted Summary Judgment on Claim for Roof Damage Caused by Windstorm

    May 26, 2026 —
    The insurer successfully moved for summary judgment, eliminating the insured’s claim for roof damage due to windstorm. Mulas v. Westchester Surplus Lines Ins. Co., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20537 (Jan. 30, 2026). The insureds’ commercial property sustained windstorm damage during Hurricane Ian. Westchester denied the claim. The insureds believed Westchester wrongfully denied coverage for roof damage and various interior damage to property. The insureds also argued that Westchester’s actual cash value (ACV) payment did not reflect the fully insured loss. The insureds sued and Westchester moved for summary judgment. Westchester argued the roof damage was not covered because Hurricane Ian did not cause the damage. Westchester hired an engineer who determined the roof damage was not caused by wind from Hurricane Ian. Westchester pointed out that the insureds’ expert also found no wind damage on the roof. The insureds offered no other evidence suggesting the hurricane caused roof damage. Therefore, the insureds could not show that Westchester breached the policy by denying coverage. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com