BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction expert witness Lapel Indiana low-income housing expert witness Lapel Indiana condominiums expert witness Lapel Indiana institutional building expert witness Lapel Indiana custom homes expert witness Lapel Indiana casino resort expert witness Lapel Indiana high-rise construction expert witness Lapel Indiana townhome construction expert witness Lapel Indiana concrete tilt-up expert witness Lapel Indiana production housing expert witness Lapel Indiana retail construction expert witness Lapel Indiana multi family housing expert witness Lapel Indiana housing expert witness Lapel Indiana Medical building expert witness Lapel Indiana office building expert witness Lapel Indiana mid-rise construction expert witness Lapel Indiana condominium expert witness Lapel Indiana landscaping construction expert witness Lapel Indiana structural steel construction expert witness Lapel Indiana tract home expert witness Lapel Indiana parking structure expert witness Lapel Indiana Subterranean parking expert witness Lapel Indiana
    Lapel Indiana construction claims expert witnessLapel Indiana construction project management expert witnessLapel Indiana construction expert witness consultantLapel Indiana stucco expert witnessLapel Indiana construction claims expert witnessLapel Indiana building expertLapel Indiana construction cost estimating expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Lapel, Indiana

    Indiana Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: According to SB45160, §IC 32-27-3-1&2 a claimant must provide written notice 60 days before filing an action. Within 21 days after service of the notice, the construction professional must serve a written response. Claimant must file list of known construction defects, description, and the construction professional responsible for each alleged defect (to the extent known).


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Lapel Indiana

    License required for plumbing. All other licensing is done at the local county level.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Henry County Chapter
    Local # 1598
    PO Box 925
    New Castle, IN 47362
    Lapel Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    East Central Indiana Builders Association Inc
    Local # 1556
    PO Box 1072
    Muncie, IN 47308
    Lapel Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Wayne County Builders Association
    Local # 1570
    PO Box 1591
    Richmond, IN 47375

    Lapel Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Indiana Builders Association
    Local # 1500
    101 W Ohio St Ste 1111
    Indianapolis, IN 46204

    Lapel Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Builders Association of Greater Indianapolis
    Local # 1544
    PO Box 44670
    Indianapolis, IN 46244

    Lapel Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Madison County Chapter
    Local # 1504
    853 E. Southern Avenue
    Indianapolis, IN 46203
    Lapel Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Builders Association of Greater Lafayette
    Local # 1548
    PO Box 5795
    Lafayette, IN 47903

    Lapel Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Lapel Indiana


    Battle of “Other Insurance” Clauses

    Two-Part Series on Condominium Construction Defect Issues

    Using Lien and Bond Claims to Secure Project Payments

    Collapse of Underground Storage Cave Not Covered

    Contractors: Consult Your Insurance Broker Regarding Your CGL Policy

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (4/24/24) – Omni Hotels Hit with Cyberattack, Wisconsin’s Low-Interest Loans for Home Construction, and Luxury Real Estate Sales Increase

    Proving & Defending Lost Profit Damages

    The Connecticut Appellate Court Decides That Construction Contractor Was Not Obligated To Continue Accelerated Schedule to Mitigate Its Damages Following Late Delivery of Materials by Supplier

    Breach of Fiduciary Duty Claim Against Insurer Survives Motion to Dismiss

    South Carolina Legislature Redefining Occurrences to Include Construction Defects in CGL Policies

    Four Families Now Live in the Season Six Rock the Block Homes in Grantsville, Utah

    Construction Law Alert: Appellate Court Lets Broad General Release Stand in SB 800 Case

    Is It Time to Revisit Construction Defects in Kentucky?

    Kahana Feld LLP Senior Attorney Rachael Marvin and Partner Dominic Donato Obtain Complete Dismissal of Plaintiff’s Labor Law Claims on Summary Judgment

    Nebraska Joins the Ranks—No CGL Coverage for Faulty Work

    Settlement between IOSHA and Mid-America Reached after Stage Collapse Fatalities

    Another (Insurer) Bites The Dust: Virginia District Court Rejects Narrow Reading of Pollution Exclusion

    Faulty Workmanship Claims Amount to Multiple Occurrences

    Creating a Custom Home Feature in the Great Outdoors

    COVID-19 Pandemic Preference Amendments to Bankruptcy Code Benefiting Vendors, Customers, Commercial Landlords and Tenants

    WA Supreme Court Allows Property Owner to Sue Engineering Firm for Lost Profits

    No Duty to Defend Under Renter's Policy

    You Should’ve Known: Colorado Holds Defendant May Have Pre-Litigation Duty to Preserve Evidence

    Mediation in the Zero Sum World of Construction

    Jenny Michel Named Top Lawyer by Acadiana Profile Magazine

    Meet Daniel Hall, Assistant Professor at TU Delft

    Jinx: Third Circuit Rules in Favor of Teamsters in Withdrawal Case

    Effective July 1, 2022, Contractors Will be Liable for their Subcontractor’s Failure to Pay its Employees’ Wages and Benefits

    Duty to Defend Affirmed in Connecticut Construction Defect Case

    The Unwavering Un-waivable Implied Warranty of Workmanship and Habitability in Arizona

    Contract Change # 10: Differing Site Conditions (law note)

    Duty to Defend Triggered by Damage to Other Non-Defective Property

    Montana Court Finds Duty to Defend over Construction Defect Allegation

    CGL Policy Covering Attorney’s Fees in Property Damage Claims

    California Court Broadly Interprets Insurance Policy’s “Liability Arising Out of” Language

    Nomos LLP Partners Recognized in Super Lawyers and Rising Stars Lists

    Insurer Must Pay for Matching Siding of Insured's Buildings

    Washington State May Allow Common Negligence Claims against Construction Professionals

    Tennessee Looks to Define Improvements to Real Property

    Not to Miss at This Year’s Archtober Festival

    Five Construction Payment Issues—and Solutions

    #4 CDJ Topic: Vita Planning and Landscape Architecture, Inc. v. HKS Architects, Inc.

    Court Upholds Appraisers' Use of "Increased Cost of Construction" Provision

    Naples, Florida, Is Getting So Expensive That City Workers Can’t Afford It

    LA County Begins Arduous Cleanup, Rebuild Effort in Altadena as New Fire Flares

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Additional Insured in Construction Defect Case

    Construction Defect Risks Shifted to Insurers in 2013

    Construction Contract Terms Matter. Be Careful When You Draft Them.

    Settlement Agreements and Contracts Require a Meeting of the Minds

    Jarred Reed Named to the National Black Lawyers’ “Top 40 Under 40” List for Second Consecutive Year
    Corporate Profile

    LAPEL INDIANA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Lapel, Indiana 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 Lapel'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
    Lapel, Indiana

    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

    How Engineers Will Determine Why NYC's Pfizer HQ Conversion Buckled

    July 13, 2026 —
    Construction crews have stabilized the former Pfizer headquarters redevelopment in Midtown Manhattan after two load-bearing structural columns buckled on the 21st floor July 7. The focus has now shifted from emergency response to determining what caused the office-to-residential conversion to suffer a major structural failure. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bryan Gottlieb, Engineering News-Record
    Mr. Gottlieb may be contacted at gottliebb@enr.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

    What Is the Independent Tort Doctrine? New Case Explains…

    August 24, 2026 —
    Florida’s Sixth District Court of Appeals in Atout v. HHM Land Trust Dated October 29, 2013, 51 Fla.L.Weekly D1569a (Fla. 6th DCA 2026) recently included an extensive discussion on Florida’s independent tort doctrine. The independent tort doctrine is an important legal doctrine, particularly when parties are in contractual privity. This doctrine stands for the proposition that tort claims must be independent of any breach of contract. See Atout, supra. The Sixth District’s extensive discussion analyzed the indicators to determine this “independence,” which may arise from the source of the duty, the asserted conduct, the damages sought, or even public policy: Unlike claims that rely on contractual relationships, an “independent” tort is often characterized by a duty imposed by law rather than by agreement. As to this consideration, United States District Court Judge Steven Merryday has explained that the independent tort doctrine honors the same divide as the economic loss rule, but rather than looking at the nature of the loss, it focuses on the source of the duty allegedly breached. “If a contract imposes a duty, and the defendant breaches that duty, the plaintiff must sue for breach of contract. If society imposes the duty, the plaintiff must sue in tort.” Following this reasoning, courts should consider whether the alleged breach of a duty in tort coincides or overlaps with a duty imposed by a contract. If the duty at issue is within the scope of a contract, and the relationship of the parties that led to the creation of that duty stems from a contract, then that duty’s source is from contract and any alleged tort claims based on a breach of those duties may not be “independent.” Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Generic Complaint Alleging Bad Faith is Insufficient

    August 24, 2026 —
    The federal district court granted the insurer’s motion for judgment on the pleadings after determining that the insured’s claims for bad faith and unfair claims settlement practices were insufficiently pled. Navia v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111261 (W.D. N. C. May 20, 2026). The insured submitted a claim for damages to real property owned by the insured allegedly caused by Hurricane Helene. State Farm advised the insured that only some of the claimed damages were covered by the policy and payment for such damages were denied because the estimate for the covered damages did not exceed the policy’s deductible. The insured sued asserting claims for breach of contract, bad faith, and unfair claim settlement practices. 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 BWB&O’s 2027 Southern California Super Lawyers and Rising Stars Honorees!

    September 08, 2026 —
    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP is proud to announce that Partners Nicole Whyte, Keith Bremer, John Toohey, and Tyler Offenhauser have been named to the 2027 Southern California Super Lawyers list. Notably, Nicole Whyte was also selected to the Top 50 Orange County Super Lawyers list, an honor reflecting her outstanding work, leadership, and impact in the legal community. Associates Kevin Moore, Sukayna Jaidi, and Andrew Mathews are also being recognized as 2027 Southern California Super Lawyers Rising Stars. Our team is being honored for their distinguished service and dedication in Family Law, Civil, Business, Construction, and Personal Injury Litigation. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara, LLP

    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

    2026 Top Business Risks for Construction and Engineering Companies

    May 26, 2026 —
    The 2026 Allianz Risk Barometer revealed some surprising findings for construction and engineering businesses. Now in its fifteenth year, this annual business risk ranking by corporate insurer Allianz Commercial incorporates the views of 3,338 global risk management professionals on the main perils on their radar for the year. Survey respondents included construction and engineering risk experts who identified the threats keeping them up at night. Here is how they ranked the top industry risks for 2026: Natural Catastrophes Natural catastrophe risk retains the top spot, with 38% of construction and engineering respondents citing this risk as their leading concern for 2026. From the insurance perspective, economic and insured losses remained high, albeit lower than the 10-year average. The evolving nature of natural catastrophes continues to pose significant challenges to businesses and the (re)insurance industry. Insured losses from natural catastrophes are set to reach $107 billion for 2025, according to Swiss Re—the sixth year in a row they have exceeded $100 billion, while economic losses are well in excess of $200 billion. Reprinted courtesy of Darren Tasker, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...