BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing expert witness Dunnell Minnesota hospital construction expert witness Dunnell Minnesota landscaping construction expert witness Dunnell Minnesota custom home expert witness Dunnell Minnesota tract home expert witness Dunnell Minnesota industrial building expert witness Dunnell Minnesota Subterranean parking expert witness Dunnell Minnesota parking structure expert witness Dunnell Minnesota concrete tilt-up expert witness Dunnell Minnesota condominium expert witness Dunnell Minnesota institutional building expert witness Dunnell Minnesota Medical building expert witness Dunnell Minnesota structural steel construction expert witness Dunnell Minnesota office building expert witness Dunnell Minnesota townhome construction expert witness Dunnell Minnesota low-income housing expert witness Dunnell Minnesota retail construction expert witness Dunnell Minnesota multi family housing expert witness Dunnell Minnesota casino resort expert witness Dunnell Minnesota high-rise construction expert witness Dunnell Minnesota production housing expert witness Dunnell Minnesota mid-rise construction expert witness Dunnell Minnesota
    Dunnell Minnesota construction expert witnessDunnell Minnesota defective construction expertDunnell Minnesota construction defect expert witnessDunnell Minnesota slope failure expert witnessDunnell Minnesota construction expertsDunnell Minnesota architect expert witnessDunnell Minnesota OSHA expert witness construction
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Dunnell, Minnesota

    Minnesota Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Statutory warranties for one-year, two-year and ten-year periods limits types of construction defects actionable under warranty law; This statute (Chapter 327A) limits liability and excludes normal wear and tear, normal shrinkage caused by drying of the dwelling, loss due to insufficient ventilation, loss or damage from negligence, improper maintenance, or alteration to dwelling, loss or damage from failure to maintain or failure to mitigate


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Dunnell Minnesota

    Residential contractors need to be licensed. If you work in two or more trades, certain trades will require a license. Call the state for details.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    South Central Builders Association
    Local # 2412
    575 Havana Rd
    Owatonna, MN 55060
    Dunnell Minnesota Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Rochester Area Builders Inc
    Local # 2465
    108 Elton Hills Lane NW
    Rochester, MN 55901

    Dunnell Minnesota Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Minnesota River Builders Association
    Local # 2487
    443 Belgrade Avenue
    North Mankato, MN 56003

    Dunnell Minnesota Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Crow River Builders Association Affil w/National Associated Home Builders
    Local # 2424
    PO Box 656
    Hutchinson, MN 55350

    Dunnell Minnesota Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Builders Association of Minnesota
    Local # 2400
    525 Park St Ste 150
    Saint Paul, MN 55103

    Dunnell Minnesota Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Builders Association of the Twin Cities
    Local # 2433
    2960 Centre Pointe Drive
    Roseville, MN 55113

    Dunnell Minnesota Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    West Central Builders Assoc
    Local # 2432
    PO Box 447
    New London, MN 56273

    Dunnell Minnesota Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Dunnell Minnesota


    Snell & Wilmer’s San Diego Office Ranked #1 “Best Place to Work” by the San Diego Business Journal

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

    Policy Reformed to Add New Building Owner as Additional Insured

    Court Rules on a Long List of Motions in Illinois National Insurance Co v Nordic PCL

    Do Not File a Miller Act Payment Bond Lawsuit After the One-Year Statute of Limitations

    School Board Sues Multiple Firms over Site Excavation Problem

    No Coverage for Sink Hole Loss

    Even Where Fraud and Contract Mix, Be Careful With Timing

    Ambiguous Application Questions Preclude Summary Judgment on Rescission Claim

    More thoughts on Virginia Mechanic’s Liens

    “Genuine” Issue of “Material” Fact and Summary Judgments

    Testing Your Nail Knowledge

    Bona Fide Dispute Defeats Violation of Prompt Payment Act

    Motion to Strike Insureds' Experts Denied, Claims under Fair Claims Settlement Act Survives Summary Judgment

    Unintended Consequences of New Building Products and Services

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 43 White and Williams Lawyers

    Court Slams the Privette Door on Independent Contractor’s Bodily Injury Claim

    Florida Insurance Legislation Alert - Part I

    Groundbreaking on New Boulder Neighborhood

    Feds to Repair Damage From Halted Border Wall Work in Texas, California

    Mandatory Energy Benchmarking is On Its Way

    Licensing Mistakes That Can Continue to Haunt You

    Goldman Veteran Said to Buy Mortgages After Big Short

    Appraisal May Include Cause of Loss Issues

    When Business is Personal: Negligent and Intentional Interference Claims

    Minnesota Senate Office Building Called Unconstitutional

    N.J. Governor Signs Bill Expanding P3s

    Don’t Ignore the Dispute Resolution Provisions in Your Construction Contract

    Home Building Likely to Stick to Slow Pace

    Bremer Whyte Congratulates Nicole Nuzzo on OCBA Professionalism and Ethics Committee Appointment

    Greg Katz Quoted in Insurance Journal Article About How Big Data & AI Are Driving Up Verdicts, Settlements

    Legal Implications of 3D Printing in Construction Loom

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Apparently, It’s Not Always Who You Know”

    GE to Repay $87 Million for Scaled-Back Headquarters Plan

    Asserting Non-Disclosure Claim Involving Residential Real Property and Whether Facts Are “Readily Observable”

    Appraisal Ordered After Carrier Finds Loss Even if Cause Disputed

    The Condominium Warranty Against Structural Defects in the District of Columbia

    Potential Pitfalls Under the Contract Disputes Act for Federal Government Contractors

    Shaken? Stirred? A Primer on License Bond Claims in California

    Does the UCC Apply to the Contract for the Sale of Goods and Services

    Utility Contractor Held Responsible for Damaged Underground Electrical Line

    Portions of Policyholder's Expert's Opinions Excluded

    How A Contractor Saved The Day On A Troubled Florida Condo Project

    PSA: Virginia Repeals Its Permanent COVID-19 Safety Standard

    Sioux City Building Owners Sue Architect over Renovation Costs

    Several Lewis Brisbois Partners Recognized by Sacramento Magazine in List of Top Lawyers

    Pennsylvania Superior Court Tightens Requirements for Co-Worker Affidavits in Asbestos Cases

    Selected Environmental Actions Posted on the Fall 2018 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulator Actions

    4 Ways to Mitigate Construction Disputes

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

    DUNNELL MINNESOTA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Dunnell, Minnesota 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. Drawing from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Dunnell'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
    Dunnell, Minnesota

    PSA: Be Sure to Document (Even When Time is Short)

    April 14, 2026 —
    Written change orders are a big deal. Almost all construction contracts (at least the well drafted ones) require written contracts. Written change orders are even important enough that Virginia law requires these provisions in residential construction contracts. Why are they so important? Because they are a “mini-contract” of sorts. They set the expectations, price, time, and work to be performed; work that was not included in the original price or scope for the project. Without this in writing, there will be no record of what the parties agreed to do. Does this sound familiar? Sound like its own contract? It should. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Finds Coverage Under Ensuing Loss Provisions

    September 29, 2026 —
    Reversing the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to the insurer, the Wisconsin Supreme Court determined that genuine issues of material fact existed on whether ensuing losses as defined in the policy were covered. Cincinnati Ins. Co. v. Ropicky, 2026 Wisc. LEXIS 302 (Wis. July 7, 2026). The insured suffered damage during a storm on May 11, 2018, when rainwater poured into the home. The insureds gave notice to their insurer, Cincinnati. Upon inspection, Cincinnati determined that water intrusion resulted from multiple construction defects in the home. In the front of the home, water entered through a gap in the stone veneer. The inspector also concluded that the damage from rainwater was not just from the May 11, 2018, storm, but damage had occurred from prior storm events. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    How AI Turns Construction Documents Into Procurement Intelligence

    May 05, 2026 —
    MEP equipment accounts for up to 40% of costs on data center or hospital projects, has lead times ranging from 20 weeks to over a year, and has historically been the most underserved area in construction software. In this episode, I speak with Victor Muchiri from BuildVision about what it actually takes to make AI useful in construction procurement, not as a pilot, but in production. We dig into why you cannot simply upload a set of construction drawings to ChatGPT and trust the output. Construction documents are complex, cross-referenced, and consequential. Without deep domain context, such as manufacturer ontologies, equipment taxonomies, and engineering expertise, AI produces plausible results, not reliable ones. BuildVision’s approach is to act as a harness around AI models, wrapping them in construction-specific knowledge so the output can be trusted for real procurement decisions. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Can Anything Supersede Excel in AEC?

    April 27, 2026 —
    If there’s one piece of software that dominates the business world across industries, it’s Microsoft Excel. Can AI finally dethrone the mighty spreadsheet? Memorable Spreadsheet Moments Everyone has memorable spreadsheet moments. I have a few. For example, my then-architecture firm was involved in more than a dozen housing developments abroad. I developed an Excel workbook that took the required number of households as input and automatically generated a breakdown of buildings and their apartment types for AutoCAD. This was urban planning and architectural design done with a spreadsheet. I also developed business software using Excel for project portfolio management. The prototype was later scaled into a commercial SaaS that is now used globally. Another memorable moment was when a property owner told me their Excel file grew so large that it ran out of rows and columns. That must have been before 2007, when the maximum number of columns on a sheet was still just 256 and the maximum number of rows was 65,536. The current limits are 1,048,576 rows and 16,384 columns, which I hope no one will exceed. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Vacant Building Negates Coverage for Broken Pipe

    September 01, 2026 —
    The Michigan Court of Appeals found the insured was not covered for water damage because the commercial space was left vacant. Cherry Hill Recreation Center, Inc. v. Conifer Ins Co., 2026 Mich, App. LEXIS 5099 (Mich Ct. App. June 18, 2026). Alan Abbas purchased a bowling alley. Due to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and executive orders issued by the governor, Abbas was unable to operate the bowling center for several months. During the winter, Abbas allowed the thermostat to drop significantly, with the building expected to be around 43 degrees Fahrenheit. He later admitted the sprinkler system’s pipes were not protected against freezing. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.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

    Seventh Circuit, With an Assist From the Illinois Supreme Court, Finds That “Pollution Exclusion” Bars Coverage For Emissions Allowed Under Regulatory Permit

    April 20, 2026 —
    In Griffith Foods Int’l Inc. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA, 24-1217 & 24-1223 (7th Cir. Mar. 13, 2026), the Seventh Circuit addressed the meaning and scope of a pollution exclusion in a standard-form commercial general liability insurance policy for underlying injuries caused by ethylene oxide (EtO) emissions. The insurance dispute arose out of underlying tort litigation involving bodily injury claims, including cancer, allegedly caused by emissions of ethylene oxide over a 35-year period from 1984 through 2019 by Griffith Foods International and later Sterigenics U.S. The pollution exclusion at issue generally barred coverage for “bodily injury” arising out of the discharge, dispersal, release or escape of smoke, vapors, soot, fumes, acids, alkalis, toxic chemicals, or other irritants, contaminants or pollutants. Interpreting similar exclusions, the Illinois Supreme Court has previously held that the standard CGL pollution exclusion bars coverage for bodily injuries caused by traditional environmental pollution (essentially industrial emissions of pollutants), but not by more commonplace emissions (such as carbon monoxide from a residential furnace or excess chlorine in a backyard swimming pool). See American States Insurance Co. v. Koloms, 177 Ill. 2d 473 (Ill. 1997). In Griffith Foods, the District Court initially concluded that the pollution exclusion did not apply because the companies emitted EtO pursuant to a permit issued by the IEPA. The District Court reached this latter conclusion by applying Erie Insurance Exchange v. Imperial Marble Corp., 957 N.E.2d 1214 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011), an Illinois intermediate appellate court decision finding it ambiguous whether a CGL policy’s pollution exclusion barred coverage for emissions authorized by regulatory permit. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason Taylor, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Taylor may be contacted at jtaylor@tlsslaw.com

    Federal Court Strikes Down New York’s Climate Superfund Act: What It Means for the “Polluter Pays” Movement

    September 28, 2026 —
    A federal judge in the Northern District of New York has struck down New York’s Climate Change Superfund Act, ruling that the “polluter pays” climate law is preempted by federal law and “simply beyond the limits of state law.” The court concluded that the Clean Air Act (CAA) does not authorize New York’s compensation scheme, which calculates liability based on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions attributable to worldwide fossil fuel extraction and refining. It separately held that any cost-recovery demand against a foreign producer would be preempted under the constitutional foreign affairs doctrine, which limits state intrusion into matters committed predominantly to the federal government. The court directed the parties to file a status report by September 14, leaving the form of further relief unresolved. In practical terms, the court has decided that the Act is preempted and cannot be enforced but has not yet determined the precise terms of its final order, including whether to formally enjoin its enforcement. The decision in West Virginia v. James, Case No. 1:25-cv-00168 (N.D.N.Y. Aug. 31, 2026), issued by Chief U.S. District Judge Brenda K. Sannes, who was appointed by President Obama, marks the first judicial invalidation of a state climate superfund statute and carries significant implications for the climate superfund landscape and the three remaining lawsuits challenging these laws. Reprinted courtesy of Amanda G. Halter, Pillsbury, Ashleigh K. Myers, Pillsbury and Jillian Marullo, Pillsbury Ms. Halter may be contacted at amanda.halter@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Myers may be contacted at ashleigh.myers@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Marullo may be contacted at jillian.marullo@pillsburylaw.com Read the full story...