BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home expert witness Custer Wisconsin multi family housing expert witness Custer Wisconsin hospital construction expert witness Custer Wisconsin housing expert witness Custer Wisconsin retail construction expert witness Custer Wisconsin industrial building expert witness Custer Wisconsin high-rise construction expert witness Custer Wisconsin custom homes expert witness Custer Wisconsin landscaping construction expert witness Custer Wisconsin parking structure expert witness Custer Wisconsin institutional building expert witness Custer Wisconsin Medical building expert witness Custer Wisconsin production housing expert witness Custer Wisconsin low-income housing expert witness Custer Wisconsin Subterranean parking expert witness Custer Wisconsin condominiums expert witness Custer Wisconsin casino resort expert witness Custer Wisconsin townhome construction expert witness Custer Wisconsin concrete tilt-up expert witness Custer Wisconsin office building expert witness Custer Wisconsin tract home expert witness Custer Wisconsin condominium expert witness Custer Wisconsin
    Custer Wisconsin building code expert witnessCuster Wisconsin construction defect expert witnessCuster Wisconsin construction expert witnessCuster Wisconsin civil engineer expert witnessCuster Wisconsin expert witness windowsCuster Wisconsin architectural engineering expert witnessCuster Wisconsin engineering expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Custer, Wisconsin

    Wisconsin Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: SB448 specifies 90 day notice with details and evidence prior to commencing legal action. It provides for a 15 day written response from contractor or 25 days if cross-claims against subcontractors; The law states “The claimant and contractor or supplier are bound by any contractor or supplier warranty terms pertaining to products or services supplied for the dwelling.”


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Custer Wisconsin

    Contractors are required to have the correct credentials for their trade. Not all classifications require credentialing. For a list of credentials, see the website.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Brown County Home Builders Association
    Local # 5124
    PO Box 13194 811 Packerland Drive
    Green Bay, WI 54307

    Custer Wisconsin Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Golden Sands Home Builders Association
    Local # 5118
    1001 Theater Dr
    Plover, WI 54467

    Custer Wisconsin Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Wolf River Builders Association
    Local # 5193
    PO Box 595
    Shawano, WI 54166
    Custer Wisconsin Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Central Wisc Home Builders Association
    Local # 5180
    2135 8th Street S
    Wisconsin Rapids, WI 54494

    Custer Wisconsin Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Chippewa Valley Home Builders Association
    Local # 5104
    4319 Jeffers Rd Ste 200
    Eau Claire, WI 54703

    Custer Wisconsin Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Door County Home Builders Association
    Local # 5103
    PO Box 112 4087
    Sturgeon Bay, WI 54235

    Custer Wisconsin Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    St Croix Valley Home Builders Association
    Local # 5182
    1632 ROLLING HILLS LN
    River Falls, WI 54022

    Custer Wisconsin Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Custer Wisconsin


    "On Second Thought"

    Enhanced Geothermal Energy Could Be the Next Zero-Carbon Hero

    The Final Frontier Opens Up New Business Opportunities for Private Contractors

    Renee Zellweger Selling Connecticut Country Home

    CA Senate Report States Caltrans ‘Gagged and Banished’ its Critics

    Time is Money. Unless You’re an Insurance Company

    Traub Lieberman Partner Eric D. Suben and Associate Laura Puhala Win Summary Judgment in Favor of Insurer, Determining it has No Duty to Defend

    “License and Registration, Please.” The Big Risk of Getting Busted for Working without a Proper Contractor’s License

    Summary Judgment Granted to Insurer for Hurricane Damage

    General Contractor’s Intentionally False Certifications Bar It From Any Recovery From Owner

    Rights Afforded to Employees and Employers During Strikes

    Students for Fair Admissions: Shaking the Foundations of EEOC Programs and M/WBE Requirements

    Apartment Construction Increasing in Colorado while Condo Construction Remains Slow

    Are Robotic Coworkers Soon a Reality in Construction?

    The 2025 Legal Horizon for U.S. Offshore Wind

    Arbitration Clause Found Ambiguous in Construction Defect Case

    Someone Who Hires an Independent Contractor May Still Be Liable, But Not in This Case

    What Construction Contractors Should Know About the California Government Claims Act

    Federal Arbitration Act Preempts Pennsylvania Payment Act

    Nevada State Senator Says HOA Scandal Shows Need for Construction Defect Reform

    Quick Note: Can a Party Disclaim Liability in their Contract to Fraud?

    Manhattan Site for Supertall Condo Finds New Owner at Auction

    Mortgage Applications in U.S. Jump 11.6% as Refinancing Surges

    Insurance Companies Score Win at Supreme Court

    How Labor Law Fraud in New York Works: A Step-by-Step Primer on the Latest Construction Accident Scheme

    Congratulations 2016 DE, NJ, and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Condominium Exclusion Bars Coverage for Construction Defect

    Builders Support Most of Bipartisan Housing Reform Bill in Congress

    Do We Need Blockchain in Construction?

    Large Canada Employers and Jobsites Mandate COVID-19 Vaccines

    Las Vegas Harmon Hotel to be Demolished without Opening

    Colorado statutory “property damage” caused by an “occurrence”

    New York Court Holds That the “Lesser of Two” Doctrine Limits Recoverable Damages in Subrogation Actions

    The Impact of the IIJA and Amended Buy American Act on the Construction Industry

    Recent Third Circuit OSHA Decision Sounds Alarm for Employers and Their Officers

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

    Homebuilders Leading U.S. Consumer Stocks: EcoPulse

    Waiver Of Arbitration by Not Submitting Claim to Initial Decision Maker…Really!

    Cincinnati Goes Green

    Steven Cvitanovic Recognized in JD Supra's 2017 Readers' Choice Awards

    AEM Pursuing ISO Standard for Earthmoving Grade-Control Data

    Standard For Evaluating Delay – Directly from An Armed Services Board Of Contract Appeal’s Opinion

    How Long is Your Construction Warranty?

    DC District Court Follows Ninth Circuit’s Lead Dismissing NABA’s Border Wall Case

    Colorado House Bill 17-1279 – A Misguided Attempt at Construction Defect Reform

    Products Liability Law – Application of Economic Loss Rule

    “Rip and Tear” Damage Remains Covered Under CGL Policy as “Accident”—for Now.

    Feds Withdraw $4.9B Conditional Loan Guarantee for Grain Belt Express Power Line

    OSHA Investigating Bridge Accident Resulting in Construction Worker Fatality

    California Booms With FivePoint New Schools: Real Estate
    Corporate Profile

    CUSTER WISCONSIN CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Custer, Wisconsin 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 Custer'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
    Custer, Wisconsin

    Insured Does Not Prevail on Summary Judgment Motion Invoking Ensuing Loss Provision

    May 05, 2026 —
    The court denied the insured’s motion for summary judgment finding genuine issues of fact regarding implication of the policy’s ensuing loss provision. Stella Prop. Dev.. & Event Productions, LLC v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15854 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 28, 2026). Stella owned a cultural center that was insured under a commercial property all-risk policy issued by Auto-Owners. A windstorm with gusts of 65 miles per hour struck the Center causing damage. The Center’s inspector found extensive wind damage on nearly all facets of the roof. Further, the inspector found the existing organic shingles were in “very poor condition” and were “defective, discontinued, and no longer available.” The estimated cost of repairs to the roof was $108,010.52. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Integration Can Inoculate in Utah

    July 20, 2026 —
    The Utah Court of Appeals recently reaffirmed, in the construction context, Utah’s strict approach to enforcing integration clauses to preclude parol evidence and other legal theories that would vary the written terms of a contract. In Reid v. All Surface LC, 2025 UT App 134, decided last September, the court affirmed in all respects the trial court’s grant of summary judgment based on the strength of an integration clause against a homeowner who sued a contractor for breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, civil conspiracy, negligence, and breach of the implied warranty of habitability. More recently, however, the same court rejected those same arguments in Tidwell v. Jensen, 2026 UT App 13 as to tort claims arising from a used car sale. The facts in Reid were sympathetic to the plaintiff. After being told she had a mold issue near a defective basement shower, the plaintiff solicited bids. A remediation contractor advised that while it could address the mold, the shower replacement should be handled by someone else. The plaintiff contacted All Surface LC, a shower replacement contractor. During an interview, the sales representative stated that All Surface could “do full mold remediation, tear everything out, and reframe the shower.” The plaintiff ultimately retained All Surface, expecting it would both resolve the mold issues and replace the shower. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Mark O. Morris, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Morris may be contacted at mmorris@swlaw.com

    David Samani Joins BHBA Podcast on Mediation Best Practices

    May 05, 2026 —
    Los Angeles Partner David Samani recently joined a Beverly Hills Bar Association (BHBA) podcast titled, “Mediation 360: Preparation from the Defense, Plaintiff, and Mediator Perspectives,” during which he shared his insights on various aspects of the mediation process. Mr. Samani, along with a plaintiff’s attorney and a mediator, presented their thoughts on topics including how to determine whether a case is appropriate for mediation, preparing to mediate a case, communicating with clients, and handling the mediation itself. Mr. Samani explained that early communication with clients is critical so that attorneys may learn what a client’s objectives are and develop an assessment of the case. He described that “from an early stage,” attorneys should determine the cost of litigation and ensure that the client understands “what an aggressive defense might entail.” As the matter progresses, attorneys and clients should “continue the dialogue” regarding costs as well as the strengths and weaknesses of the case, “making sure the client is apprised of the various alternatives that exist.” In addition, Mr. Samani discussed factors to consider when choosing a mediator, noting, “All mediators have their own styles and backgrounds.” He explained that some cases may call for a mediator with specialized knowledge in a particular area such as bankruptcy or securities, while other mediations may benefit from a mediator who understands the realities of private practice. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Contract Disputes Act and Jurisdictional Requirements

    March 17, 2026 —
    When dealing with a claim on a federal construction project, there are a couple of key background jurisdictional points. These points were briefly highlighted in the recent appeal, Mega Star Logistics Service Co. v. Department of State, CBCA 8232, 2026 WL 253738 (CBCA 2026). Here are the two points. FIRST, when it comes to jurisdiction, for a board of contract appeals “to exercise jurisdiction over a claim, the CDA [Contract Disputes Act] requires the contractor to submit a written claim to the contracting officer for a COFD [contracting officer final decision], with a subsequent appeal of the COFD or deemed denial if the CO [contracting officer] does not issue a COFD.” Thus, you need to submit a formal claim under the Contract Disputes Act to the contracting officer to get a final decision from the contracting officer (or the contracting officer waiving the final decision by not timely furnishing one). Mega Star Logistics, supra. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    White and Williams LLP Secures $42.4 Million Award for Ventana DBS LLC in Philadelphia Marriott Construction Litigation

    July 27, 2026 —
    White and Williams LLP's Construction and Surety Practice attorneys secured a significant victory for client Ventana DBS LLC in a complex commercial construction dispute before the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, Commerce Division. The trial team, led by Bill Taylor, retired Partner, and Craig O'Neill, Co-Chair of the Construction and Surety Practice Group, with support from Lindsay Liebman, Counsel, Zachary Roth, Partner, Kristen Nichols Wright, Associate, and Sue Ferrante, Legal Secretary, obtained a $42.4 million award on Ventana's claims for unpaid work, delay costs, CASPA penalties and interest, attorneys’ fees and other project-related costs arising from the construction of the Marriott W/Element Hotel Project in Philadelphia. To achieve this result, the White and Williams team managed an extensive discovery period over the course of four-years of litigation, conducted over sixty depositions, participated in court-ordered mediation and arbitration proceedings, and successfully represented Ventana during a bifurcated trial that spanned over the course of a year. Reprinted courtesy of Craig O'Neill, White and Williams, Lindsay Liebman, White and Williams, Kristen Nichols Wright, White and Williams, Zachary Roth, White and Williams and William Taylor, White and Williams Mr. O'Neill may be contacted at oneillc@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Liebman may be contacted at liebmanl@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Wright may be contacted at wrightk@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Roth may be contacted at rothz@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Taylor may be contacted at taylorw@whiteandwilliams.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

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

    May 12, 2026 —
    Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani Senior Counsel Ayushi Neogi has authored an article in the Association of Defense Counsel of Northern California and Nevada’s Defense Comment magazine examining the shifting landscape of arbitration following the Ending Forced Arbitration Act. Titled “Compelling Arbitration in a Post-Ending Forced Arbitration Act, Plaintiff-Friendly Landscape,” the article analyzes how recent legislative changes are reshaping arbitration strategy, particularly as employees gain greater ability to bypass arbitration in certain claims. Neogi provides practical insight into how courts are responding and what this means for defense counsel navigating increasingly complex and plaintiff-friendly environments. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani

    Sausage-Making Often Relies on the Good Sense of the Chef Rather than the Recipe

    June 23, 2026 —
    Even for lawyers, the rules governing litigation can get complex and convoluted. Does something need to be filed? What needs to be filed? When is the deadline for filing? Simple questions with not always with straightforward answers. This was the case in R & J Sheet Metal, Inc. v. W.E. O’Neil Construction Co. of California, 111 Cal.App.5th 878 (2025), which involved sheet metal panels lost when they fell into the Port of Long Beach harbor. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret D. Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com