BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home expert witness Petersburg Indiana casino resort expert witness Petersburg Indiana high-rise construction expert witness Petersburg Indiana office building expert witness Petersburg Indiana mid-rise construction expert witness Petersburg Indiana industrial building expert witness Petersburg Indiana townhome construction expert witness Petersburg Indiana retail construction expert witness Petersburg Indiana structural steel construction expert witness Petersburg Indiana parking structure expert witness Petersburg Indiana hospital construction expert witness Petersburg Indiana housing expert witness Petersburg Indiana Medical building expert witness Petersburg Indiana custom homes expert witness Petersburg Indiana condominium expert witness Petersburg Indiana condominiums expert witness Petersburg Indiana low-income housing expert witness Petersburg Indiana concrete tilt-up expert witness Petersburg Indiana institutional building expert witness Petersburg Indiana multi family housing expert witness Petersburg Indiana production housing expert witness Petersburg Indiana Subterranean parking expert witness Petersburg Indiana
    Petersburg Indiana construction forensic expert witnessPetersburg Indiana expert witness commercial buildingsPetersburg Indiana construction project management expert witnessesPetersburg Indiana building expertPetersburg Indiana consulting general contractorPetersburg Indiana construction claims expert witnessPetersburg Indiana stucco expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Petersburg, 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 Petersburg Indiana

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


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Builders Association of Dubois County
    Local # 1511
    1813 S A St
    Jasper, IN 47546

    Petersburg Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Gibson Co Chapter
    Local # 1530
    PO Box 386
    Princeton, IN 47670
    Petersburg Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Southern Indiana
    Local # 1566
    1601 Greentree Court
    Clarksville, IN 47129

    Petersburg Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Vincennes Area Chapter
    Local # 1563
    PO Box 531
    Vincennes, IN 47591
    Petersburg Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    River Valley Chapter of National Associated Home Builders
    Local # 1576
    PO Box 365
    Hanover, IN 47243
    Petersburg Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Lawrence County Chapter
    Local # 1535
    201 Main Street c/o Hoosier Door
    Oolitic, IN 47451
    Petersburg Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Southwestern Indiana Builders
    Local # 1524
    2175 N Cullen Avenue
    Evansville, IN 47715

    Petersburg Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Petersburg Indiana


    How Data Drives the Future of Design

    Florida Court of Appeals Rejects Insurer’s Attempt to Intervene in Underlying Lawsuit to Submit Special Interrogatories

    Attorneys Fees Under California’s Prompt Payment Statutes. Contractor’s “Win” Fails the Sniff Test

    The Black Woman Architect Who Hopes to Change the Face of Design in America

    America’s Infrastructure Gets a D+

    Is the Manhattan Bank of America Tower a Green Success or Failure?

    Japan Quake Triggers Landslides, Knocks Power Plant Offline

    If I Released My California Mechanics Lien, Can I File a New Mechanics Lien on the Same Project? Will the New Mechanics Lien be Enforceable?

    The A, B and C’s of Contracting and Self-Performing Work Under California’s Contractor’s License Law

    When Business is Personal: Negligent and Intentional Interference Claims

    Hanover, Germany Apple Store Delayed by Construction Defects

    UPDATED: No Easy Fix for Potomac River Sewage Spill, Now Estimated at $20M

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Stop - In the Name of the Law!”

    Updates to Residential Landlord Tenant Law

    Hamptons Home Up for Foreclosure That May Set Record

    Supreme Court Overrules Longstanding Decision Supporting Collection of Union Agency Fees

    ABC Announces Disaster Relief Efforts and Resources Following Hurricane Milton

    Segal McCambridge Recognized in 2026 Chambers USA Rankings

    New Jersey Court Pumps the Brakes on Product Liability Lawsuit

    Nevada Lawmakers Had Private Meetings on Construction Defects

    The Overlooked Nevada Rule In an Arena Project Lawsuit

    Sales of U.S. Existing Homes Rise to One-Year High

    Undocumented Debris at Mississippi Port Sparks Legal Battle

    Be a Good Neighbor: Protect Against Claims by an Adjacent Landowner During Construction

    The Dog Ate My Exclusion! – Georgia Federal Court: No Reformation to Add Pollution Exclusion

    Does a Landlord’s Violation of the Arizona Residential Landlord-Tenant Act Constitute Negligence Per Se?

    Brown and Caldwell Appoints Stigers as Design Chief Engineer

    'Taylor Swift Is an Economic Phenomenon': CE's Q1 2024 Economic Update and Forecast

    Federal Court Holds that Demolition Exclusion Does Not Apply and Carrier Has Duty to Defend Additional Insureds

    Is Solar the Next Focus of Construction Defect Suits?

    Policyholder Fails to Build Adequate Record to Support Bad Faith Claim

    Report: Construction Firms Could Better Protect Workers From Noise Hazards

    When Construction Defects Appear, Don’t Choose Between Rebuilding and Building Your Case

    Is Construction Heading Off the Fiscal Cliff?

    Clean Water Act Cases: Of Irrigation and Navigability

    Type I and Type II Differing Site Conditions Claims

    A Court-Side Seat: As SCOTUS Decides Another Regulatory “Takings” Case, a Flurry of Action at EPA

    Making Construction Innovation Stick

    Possible Real Estate and Use and Occupancy Tax Relief for Philadelphia Commercial and Industrial Property Owners

    Adjuster's Report No Substitute for Proof of Loss Under Flood Policy

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up 04/13/22

    Federal Circuit Clarifies Limits of Design Liability in GSA Contract Dispute

    Corps Proposes $4.6B Plan to Steel Miami for Storm Surge

    Emotional Distress Damages Not Distinct from “Annoyance and Discomfort” Damages in Case Arising from 2007 California Wildfires

    The 411 on the New 415 Location of the Golden State Warriors

    Insurer's Attempt to Challenge Appraisal Award Rejected

    Newmeyer Dillion Announces Jacqueline McCalla as Its Newest Partner

    Senate Overwhelmingly Passes Water Infrastructure Bill

    Zillow Topping Realogy Shows Web Surge for Housing Market

    Identifying Unfair Clauses in Construction Contracts
    Corporate Profile

    PETERSBURG INDIANA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

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

    Surety Liability Is Coextensive with Its Bond Principal

    April 14, 2026 —
    A recent Miller act payment bond case, U.S. f/u/b/o Whitetail General Constructors v. Northcon, Inc., 2026 WL 46671 (D.Mont. 2026), contains a short noteworthy discussion as to a surety’s liability being coextensive with that of its bond principal. If you are bonded, or you are pursuing a bond, you need to appreciate this, which is why this is a noteworthy discussion:
    A “surety’s liability on a Miller Act bond must be at least coextensive with the obligations imposed by the Act if the bond is to have its intended effect.” “Therefore, ‘the liability of a surety and its principal on a Miller Act payment bond is coextensive with the contractual liability of the principal only to the extent that it is consistent with the rights and obligations created under the Miller Act.’” In other words, “[w]here a subcontract’s terms are consistent with the Miller Act’s provisions, the surety’s liability on the Miller Act bond is coextensive with the contractual liability of its princip[al].”
    “The liability of a surety under the Miller Act is controlled by federal law, rather than state contract law[.]” The court may, however, “look to state law when interpreting contractual provisions” in a Miller Act case.
    “[T]he measure of recovery under the Miller Act is generally determined by the terms of the subcontract [or underlying contract].”
    Northcon, supra, at *4-5 (internal citations omitted).
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Insured’s Bad Faith Claim Survives Summary Judgment

    July 13, 2026 —
    The insurer’s motion for partial summary judgment to dispose of the insured’s bad faith claim was unsuccessful. Page v. State Farm Lloyds, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102293 (E.D. Texas March 18, 2026). Plaintiff insured alleged that hail and a windstorm caused damage to his property. The damage was reported to the defendant insurer. A claims adjuster inspected the property. Defendant then paid plaintiff $24,493.06, which was the total of the estimated damage minus depreciation and the deductible. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    We’re Burning Tokens to Clean Up Bad PDFs

    August 24, 2026 —
    Last Thursday, researchers from Tampere and Aalto universities reported on preliminary results of two AI- and digitalization-related projects. One project demonstrated how AI can automate the Bill of Materials process; the other tried to quantify the impact of data-driven construction and AI. The conclusion was that AI-powered automation can dramatically increase productivity, but unevenly. However, the substantial benefits may come from better outcomes rather than project efficiency. Various standards, company-specific practices, project-specific schemas, and traditions are designed for humans to comprehend. 2D drawings and text documents as PDF files, Excel sheets, and design and planning software have the information, but not the data in ideal form for automation. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Breaking Ground On New California Public Works Prevailing Wage Requirements

    April 27, 2026 —
    Seyfarth Synopsis: As of January 1, 2026, AB 889 bulldozed California’s Prevailing Wage law, which impacts public works employers—including public agencies, the contractors that work for them, and private owners and developers whose projects may be subject to public works requirements. The amended law reframes the calculation of fringe benefits for individuals who work on public works project and mandates annualization of such benefits, demolishes the practice of frontloading these benefits, and requires employers to maintain inspection-ready records of compliance. This year, AB 889 significantly revised California’s prevailing wage law, codified at Labor Code section 1773.1, to clarify the state’s prevailing wage regulations and streamline enforcement. Accordingly, as of January 1, 2026, California public works employers are required to annualize employees’ fringe benefits and maintain specific documentation demonstrating statutory compliance. These new obligations impact public agencies and their contractors, as well as private owners and developers whose projects may be subject to public works requirements. Continue reading for the blueprint of how to comply with the state’s amended prevailing wage law. Reprinted courtesy of Heather Frisch, Seyfarth Shaw LLP, Christopher Bouquet, Seyfarth Shaw LLP and Ashley Stein, Seyfarth Shaw LLP Ms. Frisch may be contacted at hfrisch@seyfarth.com Mr. Bouquet may be contacted at cbouquet@seyfarth.com Ms. Stein may be contacted at astein@seyfarth.com Read the full story...

    “The Superintendent Told Us to Do It:” Why Verbal Approval May Not Be Enough

    June 02, 2026 —
    In construction defect litigation, one scenario appears repeatedly: a subcontractor installs work in a manner that differs from the plans, specifications, manufacturer instructions, or industry standards after being verbally directed to do so by the general contractor, superintendent, architect, or owner’s representative. At the time, the decision may seem minor. The project is moving quickly, the field team wants to maintain progress, and nobody wants to stop working over what appears to be a small issue. The subcontractor may trust the superintendent or project manager and assume the conversation will be remembered later if questions arise. Years later, however, when the project experiences problems, the people involved may deny the conversation occurred, remember it differently, or simply no longer remember the project. Without written documentation, the subcontractor can find itself defending claims for defective work, even though it performed the installation exactly as directed. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Andrew Lintner, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. Lintner may be contacted at alintner@hhmrlaw.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...

    USDOT’s DBE Interim Final Rule: How It Affects Current and Out-to-Bid DOT and Airport Projects

    June 15, 2026 —
    In our April 16, 2026 post, we discussed the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Interim Final Rule (IFR) concerning Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) and Airport Concession Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (ACDBE) certification, specifically as it concerns transportation and airport projects in California. This post addresses a broader question: What does the IFR mean for current and out-to-bid DOT projects operating under pre-existing DBE goals? The answer is that the IFR did more than change who qualifies as a DBE. It also changed how federally funded transportation and airport projects must be handled during the re-evaluation period. This affects active contracts, pending procurements, airport projects, design-build teams, and anyone relying on old assumptions about DBE goals and counting of DBE and ACDBE credit. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Zachary F. Jacobson, Seyfarth Shaw LLP
    Mr. Jacobson may be contacted at zjacobson@seyfarth.com

    CEO: Power Isn’t the Only Electrical Challenge for AI Data Centers

    April 14, 2026 —
    Everyone knows that data centers are voracious consumers of electricity. In fact, the U.S. is currently scrambling to meet unprecedented levels of power demand not seen since the early days of electrification and the widespread adoption of air conditioning. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Francesco "Frio" Iorio, Engineering News-Record
    ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com