BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    multi family housing expert witness Seattle Washington Medical building expert witness Seattle Washington Subterranean parking expert witness Seattle Washington low-income housing expert witness Seattle Washington casino resort expert witness Seattle Washington tract home expert witness Seattle Washington structural steel construction expert witness Seattle Washington hospital construction expert witness Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up expert witness Seattle Washington retail construction expert witness Seattle Washington institutional building expert witness Seattle Washington townhome construction expert witness Seattle Washington production housing expert witness Seattle Washington high-rise construction expert witness Seattle Washington landscaping construction expert witness Seattle Washington industrial building expert witness Seattle Washington office building expert witness Seattle Washington custom homes expert witness Seattle Washington condominium expert witness Seattle Washington mid-rise construction expert witness Seattle Washington condominiums expert witness Seattle Washington parking structure expert witness Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington reconstruction expert witnessSeattle Washington roofing and waterproofing expert witnessSeattle Washington ada design expert witnessSeattle Washington concrete expert witnessSeattle Washington construction cost estimating expert witnessSeattle Washington consulting engineersSeattle Washington defective construction expert
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Seattle, Washington

    Washington Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: (SB 5536) The legislature passed a contractor protection bill that reduces contractors' exposure to lawsuits to six years from 12, and gives builders seven "affirmative defenses" to counter defect complaints from homeowners. Claimant must provide notice no later than 45 days before filing action; within 21 days of notice of claim, "construction professional" must serve response; claimant must accept or reject inspection proposal or settlement offer within 30 days; within 14 days following inspection, construction pro must serve written offer to remedy/compromise/settle; claimant can reject all offers; statutes of limitations are tolled until 60 days after period of time during which filing of action is barred under section 3 of the act. This law applies to single-family dwellings and condos.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Seattle Washington

    A license is required for plumbing, and electrical trades. Businesses must register with the Secretary of State.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    MBuilders Association of King & Snohomish Counties
    Local # 4955
    335 116th Ave SE
    Bellevue, WA 98004

    Seattle Washington Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Kitsap County
    Local # 4944
    5251 Auto Ctr Way
    Bremerton, WA 98312

    Seattle Washington Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Spokane
    Local # 4966
    5813 E 4th Ave Ste 201
    Spokane, WA 99212

    Seattle Washington Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of North Central
    Local # 4957
    PO Box 2065
    Wenatchee, WA 98801

    Seattle Washington Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    MBuilders Association of Pierce County
    Local # 4977
    PO Box 1913 Suite 301
    Tacoma, WA 98401

    Seattle Washington Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    North Peninsula Builders Association
    Local # 4927
    PO Box 748
    Port Angeles, WA 98362
    Seattle Washington Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Jefferson County Home Builders Association
    Local # 4947
    PO Box 1399
    Port Hadlock, WA 98339

    Seattle Washington Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Seattle Washington


    What the FIU Bridge Collapse Says About Peer Review

    Insurer Must Defend Insured Against Construction Defect Claims

    Proposed California Legislation Would Eliminate Certain Obstacles to Coverage for Covid-19 Business Income Losses

    Former NJ Army Base $2B Makeover is 'Buzzsaw' of Activity

    Colorado’s Need for Condos May Spark Construction Defect Law Reform

    Hawaii State Senate Requires CGL Carriers to Submit Premium Information To State Legislature

    Key California Employment Law Cases: October 2018

    Pollution Exclusion Prevents Coverage for Injury Caused by Insulation

    A New AAA Study Confirms that Arbitration is Faster to Resolution Than Court – And the Difference Can be Assessed Monetarily

    Failure to Comply with Contract Leaves No Additional Insured Coverage

    The 2017 ASCDC and CDCMA Construction Defect Seminar and Holiday Reception

    What Rich Millennials Want in a Luxury Home: 20,000 Square Feet

    Failure to Timely File Suit in Federal Court for Flood Loss is Fatal

    Hawaii Court Finds No Bad Faith, But Negligent Misrepresentation Claim Survives Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Action

    California Supreme Court Endorses City Authority to Adopt Inclusionary Housing Ordinance

    Commerce City Enacts Reform to Increase For-Sale Multifamily Housing

    Five New Laws to Know Before They Take Effect On Jan. 1, 2022

    Out of Eastern Europe, a Window Into the Post-Pandemic Office

    Feds Used Wire to Crack Las Vegas HOA Scam

    The Colorado Supreme Court holds that loans made to a construction company are not subject to the Mechanic’s Lien Trust Fund Statute

    Construction Litigation—Battles on Many Fronts

    Court of Appeals Discusses the Difference Between “Claims-Made” and “Occurrence-Based” Insurance Policies

    Formal Opinion No. 2020-203: How A Lawyer Is to Handle Access to Client Confidential Information and Anticipation of Potential Security Issues

    No Duty to Indemnify Where No Duty to Defend

    Wait! Don’t Sign Yet: Reviewing Contract Protections During the COVID Pandemic

    Sureties and Bond Producers May Be Liable For a Contractor’s False Claims Act Violations

    Deductibles Limited to Number of Suits Filed Against Insured, Not Number of Actual Plaintiffs

    Condemnation Actions: How Valuable Is Your Evidence of Property Value?

    Jet Crash Blamed on Runway Construction Defect

    Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal Secured by Lewis Brisbois in Coverage Dispute Involving San Francisco 49ers’ Levi Stadium

    Traub Lieberman Partners Lenhardt and Smith Obtain Directed Verdict in Broward County Failed Repair Sinkhole Trial

    Haight has been named a Metropolitan Los Angeles Tier 1 “Best Law Firm” in four practice areas and Tier 2 in one practice area by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” in 2021

    Insured's Lack of Knowledge of Tenant's Growing Marijuana Means Coverage Afforded for Fire Loss

    Construction Insurance Costs for New York Schools is Going Up

    Court of Appeal Puts the “Equity” in Equitable Subrogation

    A Guide to California’s Changes to Civil Discovery Rules

    Second Circuit Denies Petitions for Review of EPA’s Final Regulations to Establish Requirements for Cooling Water Intake Structures

    Environmental Suit Against Lockheed Martin Dismissed

    Elon Musk’s Proposed Vegas Strip Transit System Advanced by City Council Vote

    NJ Supreme Court Declines to Review Decision that Exxon Has No Duty to Indemnify Insurers for Environmental Liability Under Prior Settlement Agreement

    Changes To Commercial Item Contracting

    Be Aware of Two New Statutes that Became Effective May 1, 2021

    Building Codes Evolve With High Wind Events

    Hunton Andrews Kurth Associate Cary D. Steklof Selected to Florida Trend’s Legal Elite Up & Comers List for 2019

    The Fair Share Act Impacts the Strategic Planning of a Jury Trial

    Canada Cooler Housing Market Boosts Poloz’s Soft Landing

    Alabama Appeals Court Rules Unexpected and Unintended Property Damage is an Occurrence

    Build, Baby, Build. But Not Like This, Britain.

    OPINION: Stop Requiring Exhibit Lists!

    Construction Defects Survey Results Show that Warranty Laws Should be Strengthened for Homeowners & Condominium Associations
    Corporate Profile

    SEATTLE WASHINGTON CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

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

    Cincinnati Team Secures Summary Judgment for Paving Company in Trip-and-Fall Case

    February 05, 2024 —
    Cincinnati, Ohio (January 25, 2024) - In a recent decision by the Oldham County Circuit Court, Lewis Brisbois Partner Andrew Weber and Associate Jason Paskan obtained summary judgment for a paving company client after successfully arguing that their client did not owe the plaintiff a duty at the time leading up to her trip and fall. Although the court concluded that there was a genuine issue of fact as to whether a parking space wheel stop actually caused her fall, the court noted that whether the wheel stop “constituted an unreasonably dangerous condition necessitating a duty to eliminate them or warn of them is an entirely different matter.” Rebecca Reynolds v. Baptist Healthcare System, Inc., et al., Oldham Circuit Court Case No. 21-CI-00236, *6 (Dec. 21, 2023). The plaintiff in Reynolds drove to the hospital with her sister-in-law for medical testing. Id. at * 2. While both had been to the hospital before, due to COVID and construction in the emergency department, they had to take a different entrance into the hospital. Id. In the plaintiff’s attempt to navigate the parking lot, she allegedly tripped over a black wheel stop that was covered by a shadow. Id. The plaintiff sued the hospital as the landowner and the paving company working in the hospital’s parking lot, among others, under the theory that the failure to stripe the wheel stop, closing off spaces with the black wheel stops, or posting warnings about the condition of the parking lot would have prevented her fall. Id. at *2-3. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Appraisal Can Go Forward Prior to Resolution of Coverage Dispute

    April 08, 2024 —
    The Florida Supreme Court found that a trial court could compel an appraisal of the insured's loss prior to resolving coverage issues. Am. Coastal Ins. Co. v. San Marco Villas Condo. Ass'n, Inc., 2024 Fla. LEXIS 185 (Fla. Feb. 1, 2024). Hurricane Irma damaged San Marco Condominium Association's buildings. American Coastal paid $192,629.75 for the loss. San Marco estimated the damage to be in excess of eight million dollars. San Marco demanded an appraisal under the policy. American Coastal refused to submit to appraisal because it was premature as its investigation was still ongoing. San Marco sued American Coastal and asked the court to compel appraisal. American Coastal argued that San Marco had committed fraud or had made material misrepresentations regarding its claim. The trial court heard San Marco's appraisal motion and entered an order compelling appraisal. American Coastal appealed, bu the Second District Court affirmed. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    No Coverage for Roof Collapse During Hurricane

    January 29, 2024 —
    The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's determination that the insured's roof collapse was not covered. Exclusive Real Estate Inv., L.L.C. v. S.G.L. No. 1, Ltd., 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 29368 (5th Cir. Nov. 3, 2023). A building owned by Exclusive Real Estate partially collapsed during a rain-storm. The insurer, SGL, inspected the roof and determined that there was no coverage. Exclusive sued SGL for breach of contract and bad faith. SGL moved for summary judgment, which was granted by the district court. Exclusive appealed. The poicy covered "direct physical loss to the property" caused by windstorms. Exclusions, however, precluded coverage for losses "caused by rain, snow, sleet, sand or dust unless the direct force of wind or hail damages the building causing an opening in a roof or wall and the rain, snow, sleet, sand or dust enters through this opening." Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Congratulations to San Diego Partner Alex Giannetto and Senior Associate Michael Ibach on Settling a Case 3 Weeks Into a 5-Week Trial!

    April 15, 2024 —
    Partner Alex Giannetto and Senior Associate Michael Ibach of BWB&O’s San Diego office started a trial in San Diego set to last at least five weeks. Plaintiffs alleged causes of action of negligence, trespass and nuisance against BWB&O’s client, arguing the owner/property manager did not properly handle alleged overwatering of the front yard, allegedly resulting in a landslide impacting 8 homes on a City slope in Carlsbad. Cross-Complainant City alleged independent negligence to fix the slope it owned and controlled as well as various indemnity-based causes of action against BWB&O’s client. Plaintiffs claimed over $24 million in damages, while Cross-Complainant placed sole blame for the incident on BWB&O’s client around $6 million. Heading into trial, it was made clear that neither Plaintiffs nor Cross-Complainant would accept anything less than 7-figures to settle BWB&O’s client out of the case. In the first week of trial, BWB&O was able to leverage motions in limine, opening statements, and cross-examinations to secure a dismissal of three of the four causes of action alleged by Plaintiff that were associated with pain & suffering. In the second week of trial, BWB&O secured a dismissal of Cross-Complainant’s negligence cause of action paving the way for a settlement with Plaintiffs. Leveraging the threat of a non-suit when Plaintiffs rested, BWB&O secured resolution of Plaintiffs’ complaint for a fraction of what had previously been sought. Finally, BWB&O was able to secure a dismissal of the remaining indemnity-based causes of action in the cross-complaint and fully extract the client from the matter. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Meet Orange County Bar Associations 2024 Leaders

    April 08, 2024 —
    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP is proud to share that CEO/Founding Partner Nicole Whyte and Orange County Bar Association’s (“OCBA”) leaders are featured in the Orange County Lawyer (“OCL”) publication, Who’s Who In The OCBA, that was released earlier this month. To see this year’s 2024 board of directors, section leaders, committee chairs, task forces, and charitable fund board, please click here. Nicole Whyte provides individualized counseling and representation in all areas of Family Law. She has served on various OCBA legal committees and boards for over two decades and was elected to OCBA’s Board of Directors in 2024. She is committed to supporting the needs of the OCBA and its thriving and diverse OC legal community. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Meet the Forum's ADR Neutrals: TOM NOCAR

    March 25, 2024 —
    Company: Hahn Loeser & Parks, LLP Office Location: Columbus, Ohio Email: tnocar@hahnlaw.com Website: https://www.hahnlaw.com/professionals/j-thomas-nocar/ Law School: The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law Types of ADR services offered: Arbitration and Mediation Affiliated ADR organizations: AAA Construction Panel Geographic area served: Nationwide Q: Describe the path you took to becoming an ADR neutral. A: I am a former builder turned construction attorney. I spent 26 years building before going to law school. I’ve worn every hat in the industry—D/B business owner, owner’s rep, CM at risk, GC, design/builder, subcontractor, and vendor at some point in my prior career. I chose to adapt these experiences to a law career in 2009 with the focus of practicing construction law. Now I commonly represent commercial builders and developers. AAA added me to the Construction Roster in 2022. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Marissa L. Downs, Laurie & Brennan, LLP
    Ms. Downs may be contacted at mdowns@lauriebrennan.com

    Understanding California’s Pure Comparative Negligence Law

    November 13, 2023 —
    In order for a plaintiff to prove a defendant is negligent, the plaintiff must prove the defendant (1) owed a duty to plaintiff, (2) breached that duty, (3) the breach was the actual and proximate cause of plaintiff’s injury, and (4) the resulting monetary damage. However, for both plaintiffs and defendants it is not an all or nothing game in California. This is because California is a pure Comparative Negligence state. California’s Comparative Negligence law provides that even if a plaintiff is deemed 99% at fault, the plaintiff can still recover 1% in damages from a defendant. Thus, even if a plaintiff is deemed to be more than 50% (or even 99%) at fault for the incident, the plaintiff could still recover some monetary amount, or the defendant will still have to pay plaintiff, depending on how you see it. In most instances, a jury decides what percentage of fault to assign to each party. Just as a plaintiff must prove he/she/its negligence case against a defendant, if the defendant claims plaintiff was partially responsible for the incident, the defendant must prove plaintiff was also negligent and said negligence contributed to plaintiff’s injuries. The total amount of monetary responsibility distributed among all defendants and plaintiffs must equal 100%. As crazy as it may sound, a plaintiff found to be 99.9% at fault, is still entitled to recover 0.01% from a defendant in California. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Yaron Shaham, Kahana Feld
    Mr. Shaham may be contacted at yshaham@kahanafeld.com

    Cyber Thieves Phish Away a $735K Payment to a Minnesota Contractor

    May 06, 2024 —
    The contractor's project manager asked for money due, $735,000 under Payment Application 13, to be sent by the owner electronically. "Hi Rick," the project manager, whose first name is Jalen, wrote in an email dated Aug. 15. "Can we have payments remitted electronically as we currently have numerous uncleared checks on hold?" Reprinted courtesy of Richard Korman, Engineering News-Record Mr. Korman may be contacted at kormanr@enr.com Read the full story...