BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building expert witness Aiken South Carolina office building expert witness Aiken South Carolina retail construction expert witness Aiken South Carolina housing expert witness Aiken South Carolina Medical building expert witness Aiken South Carolina parking structure expert witness Aiken South Carolina townhome construction expert witness Aiken South Carolina Subterranean parking expert witness Aiken South Carolina condominiums expert witness Aiken South Carolina structural steel construction expert witness Aiken South Carolina casino resort expert witness Aiken South Carolina mid-rise construction expert witness Aiken South Carolina custom home expert witness Aiken South Carolina concrete tilt-up expert witness Aiken South Carolina high-rise construction expert witness Aiken South Carolina production housing expert witness Aiken South Carolina low-income housing expert witness Aiken South Carolina institutional building expert witness Aiken South Carolina landscaping construction expert witness Aiken South Carolina hospital construction expert witness Aiken South Carolina multi family housing expert witness Aiken South Carolina tract home expert witness Aiken South Carolina
    Aiken South Carolina construction expert witnessesAiken South Carolina forensic architectAiken South Carolina consulting general contractorAiken South Carolina structural concrete expertAiken South Carolina concrete expert witnessAiken South Carolina hospital construction expert witnessAiken South Carolina expert witness structural engineer
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Aiken, South Carolina

    South Carolina Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: (Amend HB446/SB433; §40-59-850) Applies only to single-family and multi-family dwellings (not to exceed 16 units or three stories). Claimant to provide written notice to contractor of subcontractor no later that 90 days before filing action; Contractor must respond within 15 days if claim description not sufficient; Contractor has 30 days from service of notice to inspect and offer remedy/settlement


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Aiken South Carolina

    A state license is required for commercial work over $5,000.00, and residential work over $200.00


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Home Builders Association of Aiken County
    Local # 4208
    P O Box 2251
    Aiken, SC 29802

    Aiken South Carolina Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Orangebg.-Bamberg
    Local # 4260
    PO Box 870
    Orangeburg, SC 29116
    Aiken South Carolina Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Horry-Georgetown Home Builders Association
    Local # 4252
    728 Highway 501 East
    Conway, SC 29526

    Aiken South Carolina Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Sumter-Clarendon
    Local # 4276
    PO Box 1215
    Sumter, SC 29151
    Aiken South Carolina Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of South Carolina
    Local # 4200
    1419 Pendleton St
    Columbia, SC 29201

    Aiken South Carolina Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Greater Columbia
    Local # 4224
    625 Taylor Street
    Columbia, SC 29202

    Aiken South Carolina Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Gr Pee Dee SC
    Local # 4232
    PO Box 13494
    Florence, SC 29504

    Aiken South Carolina Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Aiken South Carolina


    Florida Representative Wants to Change Statute of Repose

    Bankruptcy on a Construction Project: Coronavirus Edition

    Will Future Megacities Be a Marvel or a Mess? Look at New Delhi

    Choose the Right Option: How Facilitative and Evaluative Approaches Can Both Have a Role in Mediation

    Construction Resumes after Defects

    What You Need to Know About Additional Insured Endorsements

    Breach of an Oral Contract and Unjust Enrichment and Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

    Ohio Court of Appeals: Absolute Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage For Workplace Coal-Tar Pitch Exposure Claims

    Over 50 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys Recognized in 7th Edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America

    Why Being Climate ‘Positive’ Is the Buzzy New Goal of Green Building

    Fundamental Fairness Trumps Contract Language

    When is Construction Put to Its “Intended Use”?

    OSHA Joins the EEOC in Analyzing Unsafe Construction Environments

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

    Ayushi Neogi Published in ADC Defense Comment on Arbitration in Evolving Plaintiff-Friendly Landscape

    UK SFO Makes Arrests in European Data Center Bribery Probe

    How AB5 has Changed the Employment Landscape

    Sarah P. Long Expands Insurance Coverage Team at Payne & Fears

    Contractor Beware: Design-Build Firms Must Review Washington’s Licensing Requirements

    Miami's Condo Craze Burns Out on Strong Dollar

    Mortenson Subcontractor Fires Worker Over Meta Data Center Noose

    Two Injured in Walkway Collapse of Detroit Apartment Complex

    The “Right to Repair” Construction Defects in the Rocky Mountain and Plains Region

    AI Can Now Train the Soft Skills Construction Ignored

    GRSM Offices Earn Top Recognitions in 2025 Lists by The Business Journals Regional Publications

    A Court-Side Seat: Appeals and Agency Developments at the Close of 2020

    FERC’s New Order on Data Center Co-Location: What Utilities Need to Know

    Locals Concerns over Taylor Swift’s Seawall Misdirected

    Digital Twins for a Safer Built Environment

    The Heat Is On

    Defeating the Ten-Year Statute of Repose For Latent Construction Defects

    Why Ethiopia’s $5 Billion Dam Has Riled Its Neighbors

    Business Risk Exclusions Bar Faulty Workmanship Claim

    N.J. Governor Fires Staff at Authority Roiled by Patronage Hires

    Minnesota Addresses How Its Construction Statute of Repose Applies to Condominiums

    Is There Direct Physical Loss Under A Property Policy When COVID-19 is Present?

    Partners Leigh Katz and Darnisha Lewis-Bonilla Join Kahana Feld’s General Liability Practice Group in New York

    Bribe Charges Take Toll on NY Contractor

    Year and a Half Old Las Vegas VA Emergency Room Gets Rebuilt

    Traub Lieberman Chair Emeritus Awarded the 2022 Vince Donohue Award by the International Association of Claim Professionals

    American Arbitration Association Revises Construction Industry Rules and Mediation Procedures

    Rooftop Solar Leases Scaring Buyers When Homeowners Sell

    Retainage on Pennsylvania Public Contracts

    Filling Out the Contractor’s Final Payment Affidavit

    Unpaid Subcontractor Walks Off the Job and Wins

    Important Environmental Insurance Ruling Issued In Protracted Insurance-Coverage Dispute

    Don't Count On a Housing Slowdown to Improve Affordability

    Balfour in Talks With Carillion About $5 Billion Merger

    Facebook Posts “Not Relevant” Rules Florida Appeals Court

    Miller Act Claim for Unsigned Change Orders
    Corporate Profile

    AIKEN SOUTH CAROLINA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

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

    The Goal Is the Repair, Not the Lawsuit: What Colorado HOA Boards Should Consider Before Suing a Builder

    September 08, 2026 —
    Fourteen years ago, we cautioned Colorado homeowners associations against a “ready, fire, aim” approach to construction-defect litigation. In The Hidden Dangers of Construction Defect Litigation, we suggested a fairly simple proposition: when legitimate construction defects exist, the goal should be to get them repaired. Litigation should be a last resort, not an end in itself. Much has changed in Colorado construction-defect law since then. But a recent Douglas County case, and significant amendments to the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act (“CCIOA”) enacted in 2025, provide good reasons for HOA board members and owners to revisit that basic premise. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gail Gudder, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Ms. Gudder may be contacted at gudder@hhmrlaw.com

    Partner Bryan Stofferahn and Our Walnut Creek Team Secure Summary Judgment in a $28 Million Premises Liability Case!

    September 15, 2026 —
    BWB&O is proud to announce that Partner Bryan Stofferahn and the Walnut Creek Team secured a Summary Judgment on behalf of the firm’s clients, resulting in a complete dismissal of a negligence and premises liability claim. Plaintiff, a teenager, was riding his bicycle on private commercial property when he was struck by a vehicle. Plaintiff was in a coma for 6 weeks and developed major neurocognitive dysfunction from a traumatic brain injury. BWB&O’s clients are a commercial property owner and property management company, who Plaintiff contended were liable for his injuries based on the design, condition, operation, and management of the premises. Plaintiff had demanded $28 million in settlement of the claims against all defendants. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara, LLP

    Nationwide Preliminary Injunction Ordering Department of Defense to Resume Review of Wind Energy Projects

    September 21, 2026 —
    On August 6, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon granted a preliminary injunction in Renewable Northwest v. Hegseth, Case No. 3:26-cv-01092-IM, ordering the Department of Defense (DoD) to resume processing wind energy project applications under the existing statutory and regulatory framework and staying DoD’s review freeze pending final adjudication on the merits. Background In 2011, Congress created the Military Aviation and Installation Assurance Siting Clearinghouse (Clearinghouse) within DoD to review wind energy projects that might affect military operations. When a wind project developer files an application with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the FAA refers it to DoD to determine whether the project poses an “unacceptable risk to the national security.” Reprinted courtesy of Victor J. Roehm III, Snell & Wilmer, Christopher P. Colyer, Snell & Wilmer and Sara M. Ajeti, Snell & Wilmer Mr. Roehm may be contacted at vroehm@swlaw.com Mr. Colyer may be contacted at ccolyer@swlaw.com Ms. Ajeti may be contacted at sajeti@swlaw.com Read the full story...

    Conditional Payment Bond Consideration-Make Sure There Is Pay-If-Paid Provision

    June 29, 2026 —
    If a general contractor is going to have a conditional payment bond, it needs to ensure it subcontracts contain pay-if-paid or pay-when-paid provisions. This conditional payment language in subcontracts is the general contractor’s defense that it doesn’t have to pay a subcontractor UNTIL owner has paid the general contractor for the subcontractor’s work. The general contractor (and the surety) can look at the conditional payment bond with the s. 713.245 legend stamped on its face designating the conditional nature of the bond, and assume the conditional structure is locked in against the bond: no payment from the owner, no obligation to the subcontractors under the bond. But what happens when the subcontracts contain no express conditional payment language despite having a valid conditional payment bond? Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    New Law Prompts ABC Minnesota/North Dakota to Design New Telecommunications Safety Training Program

    June 29, 2026 —
    On the first day of the year, a Minnesota law requiring installers of underground telecommunication infrastructure broadband, fiber or phone lines (when projects utilize directional drilling, and/or work is being conducted within 10 feet of existing utilities) to undergo a 40-hour certification went into effect. Originally passed in mid-2024 and proposed to go into effect in July 2025, the law’s requirements were postponed until January 2026, giving ABC Minnesota/North Dakota—in partnership with NCCER and the Minnesota Cable Communications Association—time to roll out their Safety Qualified Underground Telecommunications Installer training program, which would ensure the workforce of their contractor members were certified. Reprinted courtesy of Grace Calengor, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

    It’s More Than a Feeling: Proving Construction Damages and When You Should Hire an Expert to Help Do It

    July 27, 2026 —
    When you win a bid, you might be singing that everything is going your way. Then something goes wrong. The owner hands you defective plans, sits on RFI responses or other critical information, or otherwise upends the work. The costs pile up through no fault of your own. You feel wronged, and you want to be made whole. But a feeling that you got burned is not enough. To recover, that feeling has to become something the law recognizes as damages. So, what are damages, and how do you prove them? At bottom, contract damages are the money that puts the non-breaching party (i.e., the party that doesn’t breach the contract) in the position it would have occupied had the contract been performed. Reprinted courtesy of Bradley E. Sands, Jones Walker LLP and Katie McCracken, Summer Associate, University of Georgia School of Law Read the full story...
    Mr. Sands may be contacted at bsands@joneswalker.com

    Massachusetts Construction Industry Continues to Wait While Prompt Payment Law Is Put to the Test

    March 31, 2026 —
    Earlier this month, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) heard argument in J.C. Cannistraro, LLC v. Columbia Construction Co. et al., a dispute concerning the state’s Prompt Payment Act (PPA). Although a decision has yet to be issued, it could potentially pose widespread implications for high-value private construction projects moving forward – and perhaps backwards. The PPA, G. L. c. 149, § 29E, enacted by the Massachusetts Legislature in 2010, has become a keystone in the construction industry. It was enacted to address, in part, downstream cash flow issues that tend to pervade construction projects by mandating a series of strict guidelines for submitting, and responding to, payment applications for private projects valued over $3,000,000. Amongst these requirements are set timeframes to respond to an application, as well as what must be contained in an application rejection. Critically, if an owner or upper-tier contractor fails to fully comply with all the statutory requirements in response to a proper payment application, the application is automatically “deemed to be approved” and payable. Significantly, however, this is not always the end of the line. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Catherine Maronski, Robinson Cole
    Ms. Maronski may be contacted at cmaronski@rc.com

    Prefatory Contract Language Cannot Be Used to Create an Ambiguity with Operative Provisions

    May 12, 2026 —
    Contract drafting and interpretation matters. A case dealt with the potential conflict with prefatory language in an agreement compared with operative provisions in the agreement. The trial court held that the operative provisions control. I discussed this case here where the appellate court reversed based on the prefatory language. But, through a motion for rehearing, the appellate court reconsidered its position and affirmed the trial court based on the operative provisions, mainly that the prefatory language cannot be used to create an ambiguity with operative provisions. Consider this explanation in affirming the trial court:
    Because the trial court correctly found that the initial language in the contract was prefatory and could not be used to create an ambiguity in the remainder of the contract, we affirm the final judgment.
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com