BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominium expert witness Alexandria South Dakota townhome construction expert witness Alexandria South Dakota hospital construction expert witness Alexandria South Dakota low-income housing expert witness Alexandria South Dakota custom home expert witness Alexandria South Dakota retail construction expert witness Alexandria South Dakota condominiums expert witness Alexandria South Dakota industrial building expert witness Alexandria South Dakota institutional building expert witness Alexandria South Dakota landscaping construction expert witness Alexandria South Dakota casino resort expert witness Alexandria South Dakota high-rise construction expert witness Alexandria South Dakota production housing expert witness Alexandria South Dakota mid-rise construction expert witness Alexandria South Dakota parking structure expert witness Alexandria South Dakota Subterranean parking expert witness Alexandria South Dakota structural steel construction expert witness Alexandria South Dakota office building expert witness Alexandria South Dakota concrete tilt-up expert witness Alexandria South Dakota multi family housing expert witness Alexandria South Dakota housing expert witness Alexandria South Dakota Medical building expert witness Alexandria South Dakota
    Alexandria South Dakota architectural engineering expert witnessAlexandria South Dakota construction expert witnessAlexandria South Dakota building consultant expertAlexandria South Dakota construction expert witness public projectsAlexandria South Dakota defective construction expertAlexandria South Dakota construction code expert witnessAlexandria South Dakota construction scheduling expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Alexandria, South Dakota

    South Dakota Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Case law precedent


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Alexandria South Dakota

    No state license is required. A license is required for asbestos, plumbing, electrical, and well drilling trades.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Mitchell Area Chapter of National Associated Home Builders
    Local # 4340
    PO Box 1152
    Mitchell, SD 57301
    Alexandria South Dakota Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of The Sioux Empire
    Local # 4305
    6904 S Lyncrest Pl
    Sioux Falls, SD 57108

    Alexandria South Dakota Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Black Hills Home Builders Association
    Local # 4301
    3121 W Chicago St
    Rapid City, SD 57702

    Alexandria South Dakota Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Brookings Regional Builders Association
    Local # 4323
    PO Box 323
    Brookings, SD 57006

    Alexandria South Dakota Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Lewis & Clark Area Home Builders Association
    Local # 4330
    PO Box 582
    Yankton, SD 57078
    Alexandria South Dakota Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    South Dakota Home Builders Association
    Local # 4300
    PO Box 1218
    Pierre, SD 57501

    Alexandria South Dakota Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Oahe Home Builders Association
    Local # 4360
    PO Box 221
    Pierre, SD 57501
    Alexandria South Dakota Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Alexandria South Dakota


    Ahead of the Storm: Preparing for Irma

    Maybe California Actually Does Have Enough Water

    American Arbitration Association Revises Construction Industry Rules and Mediation Procedures

    Las Vegas Harmon Hotel to be Demolished without Opening

    The Harmon Hotel Construction Defect Trial to Begin

    Update: Lawyers Can Be Bound to Confidentiality Provision in Settlement Agreement

    Kaboom! Illinois Applies the Anti-Subrogation Rule to Require a Landlord’s Subrogating Property Insurer to Defend a Third-Party Complaint Against Tenants

    Deck Built, Towers Stalled: $1B Fenway Center Air-Rights Project Hits Turbulence

    More Broad-Based Expansion for Construction Industry Expected in 2015

    WARN Act Exceptions in Response to COVID-19

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Sub-Contractor

    Florida Chinese drywall, pollution exclusion, “your work” exclusion, and “sistership” exclusion.

    Orlando Commercial Construction Permits Double in Value

    Haight Welcomes Robert S. Rucci

    U.K. Puts Tax on Developers to Fund Safer Apartment Blocks

    Zoning Hearing Notice Addressed by Georgia Appeals Court

    California Reinstates COVID-19 Supplemental Paid Sick Leave

    Recognize: A Construction Safety Week Technical Bulletin

    Rhode Island Affirms The Principle That Sureties Must be Provided Notice of Default Before They Can be Held Liable for Principal’s Default

    Boots on the Ground- A Great Way to Learn and Help Construction Clients

    A Word to the Wise about Construction Defects

    Edinburg School Inspections Uncovered Structural Construction Defects

    Extreme Flooding Overwhelms New York Roadways, Killing 1 Person

    U.S. Homeownership Rate Rises for First Time in Two Years

    Client Alert: Michigan Insurance Company Not Subject to Personal Jurisdiction in California for Losses Suffered in Arkansas

    Enforceability of Contract Provisions Extending Liquidated Damages Beyond Substantial Completion

    Insured’s Bad Faith Insurance Claim Evaporates Before its Eyes

    Read Her Lips: “No New Buildings”

    Gardeners in the City of the Future: An Interview with Eric Baczuk

    Resulting Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

    Supreme Court of Canada Broadly Interprets Exception to Faulty Workmanship Exclusion

    The EPA’s Renovation, Repair, and Painting Rule: Are Contractors Aware of It?

    Thank Your Founding Fathers for Mechanic’s Liens

    Witt Named to 2017 Super Lawyers

    New Notary Language For Mechanics Lien Releases and Stop Payment Notice Releases

    Lease-Leaseback Fight Continues

    Approaching Design-Build Projects to Avoid (or Win) Disputes

    Coronavirus Is Starting to Slow the Solar Energy Revolution

    GRSM New York Founding Partner Mercedes Colwin Honored with 2025 Excellence in Diversity Award by PLUS Foundation

    No Coverage for Repairs Made Before Suit Filed

    Trump Soho May Abandon Condos to Operate Mainly as Hotel

    Commercial Real Estate in 2023: A Snapshot

    Subcontractor’s Claim against City Barred by City’s Compliance with Georgia Payment Bond Statute

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces New Partner Bahaar Cadambi

    Thank You for 17 Years of Legal Elite in Construction Law

    Beyond the Storm: How Non-Hurricane Catastrophes Expose Florida’s Construction Defect Blind Spot

    XL Group Pairs with America Contractor’s Insurance Group to Improve Quality of Construction

    Robots on Construction Sites Are Raising Legal Questions

    Las Vegas Partner Jeffrey Saab and Team Leader D. Ryan Efros Secure a $0.00 Settlement on a Multimillion-Dollar Construction Defect Case!

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Win Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings In Favor of Insurer
    Corporate Profile

    ALEXANDRIA SOUTH DAKOTA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Alexandria, South Dakota Construction Expert Witness Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 7,000 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Alexandria'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
    Alexandria, South Dakota

    Supply Chain Is a Legal Exposure—Not Just a Force Majeure Problem

    September 08, 2026 —
    This is not another force majeure article. The supply-chain related legal exposure that contractors are carrying today—in sanctions risk, specification non-compliance, warranty exposure and regulatory volatility—extends well beyond what even a well-drafted force majeure clause protects. An engineering, procurement and construction contractor on a gas-fired power plant discovers during commissioning that transformer oil in a critical unit contains Russian-origin naphthenic base oil, which is a prohibited source under Office of Foreign Assets Control sanctions. The contractor didn’t source it. A subsupplier two tiers below made the substitution when disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz tightened the primary supply chain for this specialty product and no one in the purchase-order chain flagged it. The procurement decision is long done and the documentation trail that should have caught it doesn’t exist. Reprinted courtesy of Owen Newman, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...
    Mr. Newman may be contacted at oknewman@duanemorris.com

    Every High-Tech Building Has Many Lifespans

    August 16, 2026 —
    When I worked as an architect, our team designed a laboratory for fuel research. The facility included a large research hall where various boilers and other devices were tested and analyzed. The setup required extensive floor channeling under the thick concrete floor. We suggested building a modular system that would allow flexibility in the future, when requirements would certainly change. They did not want that because of budget constraints. The high-tech construction trend is spreading. Data centers, semiconductor fabs, battery plants, and life science facilities share one property that sets them apart from ordinary buildings. The technology inside turns over faster than the structure around it. Server generations change every three to five years. Rack densities have risen from 10 or 20 kW to 130 kW and beyond in just a few years. A high-tech facility is really several buildings with different lifespans inside one envelope, and we keep designing them as if they were one. The failure is not that things become obsolete. It is that we never say when each layer is expected to. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    No Bad Faith Despite Insurer’s Appraisal Award Exceeding Initial Payment

    August 03, 2026 —
    The federal district court granted the insurer’s motion for summary judgment, finding no bad faith despite the appraisal award exceeding the amount the insurer initially paid. Jazi Kat 4659 Rockridge LLC, et al. v. Travelers Cas. Ins. Co. of Am., et al., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105634 (D. Ariz. May 13, 2026). Plaintiffs sued Travelers for breach of contract and bad faith, alleging that Travelers failed to pay money plaintiffs were owed under the policy. Plaintiffs held a commercial property policy for two properties. A fire destroyed one of the properties. Travelers adjusted the claim and issued two payments. Plaintiffs disagreed with the amount of the payments and demanded an appraisal. Travelers agreed to the appraisal. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    PJM’s Reliability Backstop Procurement Proposal—Fast-Track Capacity to Meet Rising Large-Load Demand

    May 12, 2026 —
    In January, we discussed the Statement of Principles jointly signed by the National Energy Dominance Council and governors across the mid-Atlantic region—framing accelerating demand (especially from large-scale data centers) as an emergency reliability issue for PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM), the nation’s largest power grid operator. That policy signal is now becoming a near-term, accelerated procurement and contracting exercise. On April 8, 2026, PJM notified stakeholders of a critical issue fast path reliability backstop procurement process. PJM subsequently released a request for information (RFI) with respect to a proposed Reliability Backstop Procurement (RBP)—a one-time mechanism intended to attract significant new capacity to address projected reliability shortfalls driven by large-load growth. RBP compresses what is often a multiyear market and regulatory conversation into a fast-moving set of commercial choices. Developers, large loads, utilities and capital providers should be preparing now for (i) an accelerated bilateral contracting window and (ii) a standardized PJM-led backstop procurement if bilateral deals do not clear enough capacity. Reprinted courtesy of Stephen J. Humes, Pillsbury, Alicia M. McKnight, Pillsbury, Jason Drogin Atwood, Pillsbury and Andrew H. Jacobs, Pillsbury Mr. Humes may be contacted at stephen.humes@pillsburylaw.com Ms. McKnight may be contacted at alicia.mcknight@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Atwood may be contacted at jason.atwood@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Jacobs may be contacted at andrew.jacobs@pillsburylaw.com Read the full story...

    Pulling the Plug, Preserving the Product: Protecting Rights to a Modular Subcontractor’s Work Post-Termination

    June 08, 2026 —
    Volumetric Modular Construction (VMC) is a building method where a structure is divided into large components or modules, fabricated in an offsite factory and then transported to a construction site for assembly.[1] Proponents of VMC hail it as a cost-efficient alternative to traditional building methods that leads to more consistent quality and shorter construction duration.[2] Due to a growing labor shortage, high demand for compressed project schedules, and stagnant construction productivity rates, the construction industry is embracing VMC.[3] A recent report on the market size of prefabricated construction estimates that from 2026 to 2031, VMC will grow at a compound annual growth rate of 7.16% and become a 413.11-billion-dollar industry.[4] As VMC becomes more prevalent, owners, general contractors, and subcontractors must consider how to effectively contract for modular construction. One important consideration, which this article focuses on, is navigating termination of a modular subcontractor. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Paul Williamson, Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Mr. Williamson may be contacted at pwilliamson@pecklaw.com

    AI Data Centers Become City-Scale Infrastructure, Prompting New Industry Playbook

    August 11, 2026 —
    AI data centers are no longer just buildings. They are increasingly reaching power-demand levels more commonly associated with municipalities, prompting industry groups to launch a new framework they say is needed to keep pace with rapidly changing power, cooling and reliability requirements. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bryan Gottlieb, Engineering News-Record
    Mr. Gottlieb may be contacted at gottliebb@enr.com

    Presumption of Prejudice Applies to All Affirmative Defenses Regarding Insured’s Failure to Comply with Post-Loss Policy Conditions

    June 23, 2026 —
    n a recent property insurance coverage dispute, an issue on appeal pertained to the “prejudice” jury instruction associated with the insured’s failure to comply with post-loss policy conditions. The trial court found that the prejudice only pertained to prompt notice and not other post-loss policy conditions. This was reversed on appeal as prejudice applied to ALL the post loss policy conditions that the insured failed to comply with, not just the prompt notice requirement. The prejudice presumption applies to all affirmative defenses regarding an insured’s failure to comply with post-loss policy conditions. Consider this discussion when dealing with an insurer raising prejudice as an affirmative defense to do an insured’s failure to comply with post-loss policy conditions, and the associated burdens of proof: On appeal, [the insurer] contends the trial court erred by instructing the jury that the presumption of prejudice was inapplicable to all of its post-loss obligation defenses except prompt notice. We agree. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Sometimes a General Damages Assessment is Enough. . .

    July 06, 2026 —
    It has been a while since I last posted here at Construction Law Musings. Life, law practice, and “blogger’s block” have taken their toll on the posting schedule. Hopefully this will be one of several upcoming posts now that the litigation schedule has lightened a bit over the summer. Today’s post is about damages. Specifically damage to a homeowner’s roof and her legal damages therefor. That last is of course a sentence that only a construction attorney (or other litigator) could possibly craft and have it make sense. Now, on with the case. . .In Hardesty Construction, Inc. v. Weedon, the facts are as follows: Ms. Weedon had hail damage to the roof of her home. She hired Hardesty Construction to repair and replace the roof. After the first roof was installed and failed inspection, a second roof was installed. The issue was that the first roof had a warranty and the second roof, installed similarly to the first (and allegedly with the same construction issues according to Ms. Weedon’s expert), was not provided with the promised warranty. As one may expect, Weedon sued Hardesty and Hardesty Construction for fraudulent inducement and breach of contract. At trial, Weedon testified, without objection, that her home was worth $40,000 less because of Hardesty Construction’s work, which was based partially on quotes Weedon received to fix the roof. The Circuit Court granted Hardesty Construction’s motion to strike Weedon’s fraudulent inducement claim, but not her other claims. A jury awarded Weedon $30,253.30 on her breach of contract claim. Hardesty Construction appealed, arguing the Circuit Court erred in (a) allowing the jury to consider Weedon’s valuation testimony because it was not based on her personal knowledge and (b) denying its motion to strike based on insufficient evidence as to damages. Weedon assigned cross-error in the Circuit Court’s decision to grant the motion to strike her fraudulent inducement claim against Samual Hardesty. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com