BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing expert witness Canyon Creek Montana casino resort expert witness Canyon Creek Montana townhome construction expert witness Canyon Creek Montana Medical building expert witness Canyon Creek Montana concrete tilt-up expert witness Canyon Creek Montana tract home expert witness Canyon Creek Montana multi family housing expert witness Canyon Creek Montana high-rise construction expert witness Canyon Creek Montana custom homes expert witness Canyon Creek Montana condominium expert witness Canyon Creek Montana structural steel construction expert witness Canyon Creek Montana housing expert witness Canyon Creek Montana industrial building expert witness Canyon Creek Montana mid-rise construction expert witness Canyon Creek Montana condominiums expert witness Canyon Creek Montana parking structure expert witness Canyon Creek Montana office building expert witness Canyon Creek Montana institutional building expert witness Canyon Creek Montana hospital construction expert witness Canyon Creek Montana retail construction expert witness Canyon Creek Montana landscaping construction expert witness Canyon Creek Montana custom home expert witness Canyon Creek Montana
    Canyon Creek Montana construction scheduling expert witnessCanyon Creek Montana building code compliance expert witnessCanyon Creek Montana consulting general contractorCanyon Creek Montana slope failure expert witnessCanyon Creek Montana construction cost estimating expert witnessCanyon Creek Montana multi family design expert witnessCanyon Creek Montana construction expert witness public projects
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Canyon Creek, Montana

    Montana Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: SB 389; Code Section 70-19-427 requires homeowners to provide notice of an alleged construction defect before filing a lawsuit. The contractor has the option to offer to inspect the defect, repair the defect, offer a settlement or dispute the claim. After being served with written notice, the contractor has 21 days to respond: offer to inspect the defect, repair the defect, offer a settlement or dispute the claim.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Canyon Creek Montana

    Businesses must register with the Secretary of State. No state license is required for general contracting. Licensure is required for plumbing, electrical, and crane operating trades.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Missoula Building Industry Association
    Local # 2788
    1840 S Ave W
    Missoula, MT 59801

    Canyon Creek Montana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Helena Building Industry Association
    Local # 2766
    3180 Dredge Dr Ste B
    Helena, MT 59602

    Canyon Creek Montana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Montana Home Builders Association
    Local # 2700
    1717 11th Ave
    Helena, MT 59601

    Canyon Creek Montana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Great Falls
    Local # 2744
    600 6th St NW Ste 5
    Great Falls, MT 59404
    Canyon Creek Montana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Bitterroot Building Industry Association
    Local # 2729
    PO Box 1299
    Hamilton, MT 59840

    Canyon Creek Montana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Rocky Mountain Chapter
    Local # 2750
    PO Box 154
    Anaconda, MT 59711
    Canyon Creek Montana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Billings
    Local # 2722
    PO Box 875
    Billings, MT 59103

    Canyon Creek Montana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Canyon Creek Montana


    Third Circuit Holds That Duty to Indemnify "Follows" Duty to Defend

    Condominium Association Responsibility to Resolve Construction Defect Claims

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

    Norristown, PA to Stop Paying Repair Costs for Defect-Ridden Condo

    Court Retained Jurisdiction to Enforce Settlement Under Code of Civil Procedure Section 664.6 Despite Dismissal of Complaint

    Toolbox Talk Series Recap - The New Science of Jury Trial Advocacy

    E-Commerce Logistics Test Limits of Tilt-Up Construction

    Hurricane Claim Cannot Survive Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause

    Ruling Closes the Loop on Restrictive Additional Insured Endorsement – Reasonable Expectations of Insured Builder Prevails Over Intent of Insurer

    Mendocino Hospital Nearing Completion

    Can an App Renovate a Neighborhood?

    TOP TAKE-AWAY SERIES: The 2023 Fall Meeting in Washington, D.C.

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected to the 2020 Southern California Super Lawyers List

    Conditional Judgment On Replacement Costs Awarded

    Triple Points to the English Court of Appeal for Clarifying the Law on LDs

    No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Causing Property Damage to Insured's Product Only

    Pine Island Bridge in Place as Florida Pushes Barrier Island Access in Ian's Wake

    The “Climate 21 Project” Prepared for the New Administration

    A Trivial Case

    Washington Supreme Court Expands Contractor Notice Obligations

    Clean Energy and Conservation Collide in California Coastal Waters

    Arizona Supreme Court Leaves Limits on Construction Defects Unclear

    EPA Looks to Reduce Embodied Carbon in Materials With $160M in Grants

    Construction Robotics: The Sentiment-Implementation Gap

    Texas Court of Appeals Conditionally Grant Petition for Writ of Mandamus to Anderson

    What to Expect From the New Self-Retracting Devices Standard

    Beverly Hills Voters Reject Plan for Enclave's Tallest Building

    Infrastructure Money Comes With Labor Law Strings Attached

    Bribe Charges Take Toll on NY Contractor

    Court of Appeals Upholds Default Judgment: Serves as Reminder to Respond to Lawsuits in a Timely Manner

    New WA Law Caps Retainage on Private Projects at 5%

    Texas Supreme Court Rules on Contractual Liability Exclusion in Construction Cases

    U.S. Supreme Court Halts Enforcement of the OSHA Vaccine or Test Mandate

    Surplus Lines Carriers Cannot Compel Arbitration in Louisiana

    Valerie A. Moore and Christopher Kendrick are JD Supra’s 2020 Readers’ Choice Award Recipients

    From the Ashes: Reconstructing After the Maui Wildfire

    Details Matter: The Importance of Strictly Following Public Bid Statutes

    Did Deutsche Make a Deal with the Wrong Homeowner?

    States and Municipalities Advance Climate Change Lawsuits as Trump Administration Seeks to Block Them

    Six-Month Prison Term for Role in HOA Scam

    Compass, Zillow Take Feud Over Home Listings Into NYC Court

    Injured Construction Worker Settles for Five Hundred Thousand

    Preparing for the 2015 Colorado Legislative Session

    Examination of the Product Does Not Stop a Pennsylvania Court From Applying the Malfunction Theory

    Hunton Offers Amicus Support in First Circuit Review of “Surface Water” Under Massachusetts Law

    California Contractors: Amended Section 7141.5 Provides Important License Renewal Safety Net

    Chambers USA 2020 Ranks White and Williams as a Leading Law Firm

    Include Contract Clauses for Protection Against Ever-Evolving Construction Challenges

    Report to Congress Calls for Framework to Cut Post-Quake Recovery Time

    General Contractors: Consider Importance of "Primary Noncontributory" Language
    Corporate Profile

    CANYON CREEK MONTANA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

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

    Eleventh Circuit Permits Florida Restrictions on Property Ownership by Certain Foreign Nationals to Go Forward

    January 13, 2026 —
    New York, N.Y. (December 4, 2025) - On November 4, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued a long-anticipated decision in Shen v. Simpson, upholding the constitutionality of a Florida law, SB 264, which restricts ownership of or investment in Florida real estate by individuals “domiciled” in the People’s Republic of China and to a lesser extent, other countries of concern (which are identified in the statute as Russia, North Korea, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela and Syria) who are not American citizens or green card holders. The restriction encompasses residential, commercial and agricultural real estate. Oral argument in the case was held on April 19, 2024, and it took the court almost one year and seven months to issue its opinion, an unusually long turn-around time. This Update follows previous Lewis Brisbois alerts on Florida’s law and legal challenges to it. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Minyao Wang, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Wang may be contacted at Minyao.Wang@lewisbrisbois.com

    “Number nine, Number nine…”: Newark Trial Team Obtains “No Cause” Verdict in Ninth Trial of Year

    December 15, 2025 —
    Newark, N.J. (October 21, 2025) - Starting their ninth trial of the year – eight juries, one bench – the trial team of Newark Partner Afsha Noran and Managing Partner Colin P. Hackett recently obtained a “No Cause” verdict for a national owner, developer, builder, and operator of real estate. While the trial was relatively short, totaling four days and eight witnesses, the “No Cause” verdict was nonetheless gratifying for the client and the New Jersey trial team. As in any slip/trip/fall action, the plaintiff alleged the firm client failed to properly maintain their retail space, which led to the plaintiff slipping, falling and fracturing a femoral condyle bone. This resulted in the plaintiff undergoing surgery and being wheelchair bound for over three months, as well as needing home modifications consisting of an exterior home ramp and commode. The plaintiff’s expert opined that the plaintiff was, is, and will continue to be in pain for the rest of her life, and will require pain management treatment and a future knee replacement. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    New Executive Order Prohibits Federal Contractors from Engaging in DEI Through Employment and Procurement Activities

    April 27, 2026 —
    On March 26, 2026, President Trump signed Executive Order 14398, entitled Addressing DEI Discrimination by Federal Contractors, requiring federal agencies to add contractual language in all federal contracts prohibiting contractors and subcontractors from engaging in any racially discriminatory DEI activities, as defined by the Executive Order (EO). While this EO includes language similar to prior DEI-related orders, it introduces a significant expansion in enforcement by subjecting non-compliant contractors to liability under the False Claims Act (FCA), including exposure to whistleblower actions and qui tam litigation. A qui tam claim is a civil action by a private individual on behalf of the government alleging fraud against federal programs and seeking to recover damages. The new EO states that involvement in any racially discriminatory DEI activities is not only unethical and illegal, but also deemed fraudulent against federal programs because it is material to the government’s payment decisions. The definition of DEI activities here matters, as this EO expands a contractor’s obligations beyond the management of its employment policies and includes prohibitions against funding or expending time or resources on DEI activities and contracting with subcontractors, vendors, or suppliers utilizing DEI programs. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Laura De Santos, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani
    Ms. De Santos may be contacted at ldesantos@grsm.com

    One Industry, One Goal: Construction Safety Week 2026

    May 05, 2026 —
    Construction safety has long been a top priority across the industry. Yet fatality rates have remained stubbornly flat for more than a decade. Steven Carter, global health and safety director at Gilbane chair company for Construction Safety Week 2026—believes the industry has reached a pivotal moment. This year’s theme—”All In Together: Recognize. Respond. Respect.”—is a unified call to action for owners, designers, contractors and craft professionals around a shared, risk-based approach to preventing serious injuries and fatalities. In a recent interview with Construction Executive, Carter discusses why the industry must move beyond incremental improvements, how technology and AI can support better planning and what it will take to create a true culture of psychological safety on jobsites. Reprinted courtesy of Maggie Murphy, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

    Applicability of Florida’s Building Code Is a Question of Law

    November 21, 2025 —
    The application of Florida’s Building Code is a question of law for the court. It’s NOT a question for a witness to determine. In a recent personal injury dispute dealing with the tripping and falling on a public sidewalk, a key issue included the application of Florida’s Building Code on a Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) project. Summary judgment was granted for the defendants where a major portion of the ruling was based on the inapplicability of Florida’s Building Code to the public sidewalk. Even though the plaintiff had an expert witness that opined that the Florida Building Code did apply, the trial court rejected this opinion in determining the Code did not apply:
    Whether the Florida Building Code is applicable to this case ultimately is a question of law belonging to the court, not the witness. See Lindsey v. Bill Arflin Bonding Ag., Inc., 645 So. 2d 565, 568 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (“The legal effect of a building code presents a question of law for the court, not a question of fact for the jury.”); see also Edward J. Seibert, A.I.A. Architect & Planner, P.A. v. Bayport Beach & Tennis Club Ass’n, Inc., 573 So. 2d 889, 891-92 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (“An expert should not be allowed to testify concerning questions of law and the interpretation of the building code presented a question of law. It was the duty of the trial court to interpret the meaning of the code . . . .” (citations omitted)). As such, it was the responsibility of the trial court to determine whether the building code applies to the sidewalk in this case and whether the code provided evidence of negligence. See Martin v. Omni Hotels Mgmt. Corp., No. 6:15-cv-1364-ORL-41KRS, 2017 WL 2928154, at *4 (M.D. Fla. April 19, 2017) (“Accordingly, [the expert] may not testify as to the applicability or inapplicability of any provision of the Florida Building Code. This Court will determine what provisions, if any, are applicable to the facts of this case.”).
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    AI Adoption in Construction: A UK Practitioner’s View

    April 20, 2026 —
    I recently talked with Chris Brady, an AI adoption consultant based in Birmingham, UK, who has spent 18 years working in construction. Two years ago, he began integrating AI into his work with contractors and SMEs, initially as an add-on service, and it has since become his main business. Chris now runs Metrix, an AI consultancy focused on UK construction companies, alongside two other ventures: Trade Upskill, an education platform for construction professionals, and ctrldash.ai, a compliance-automation SaaS for construction SMEs, both of which are soon to launch. What struck me most in our conversation was how grounded his approach is, built on years of direct industry experience rather than arriving from outside with a technology solution looking for a problem. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    How to Properly Fill Out and Use the Conditional Waiver and Release on Progress Payment Form Used in California Construction

    December 15, 2025 —
    This is the first article in a series of four articles discussing how to properly fill out the four California construction releases described in California Civil Code 8132 – 8138. Let me start by noting that in addition to practicing construction law for more than 35 years, I chaired the committee of California construction attorneys who revised those sections of the California Civil Code dealing with this release form and many other construction forms as part of Senate Bill 189 in 2010. I also wrote the first version of this release form and made it free to the public well before the new law took effect in 2012. With this background, let me note a few things about the Conditional Waiver and Release on Progress Payment form to help you avoid mistakes that might prevent you from achieving the intended effect or the form or releasing claim rights to a greater extent than you intend. At the end of this article is a copy of the form itself which includes numbers coinciding with the instructions I will give below. A live electronically fillable version of the form is available on our firm’s website (www.porterlaw.com) under the “Forms” section. It is free and you can fill it out on your screen before printing it out and signing it. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, Porter Law Group
    Mr. Porter may be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com

    Quick Note: Include Key Time Related Facts in Contract to Avoid an Ambiguity

    February 17, 2026 —
    When drafting or negotiating a contract, it is important to consider key time-related facts. In other words, if there are important provisions dealing with time, you don’t want to leave them undefined as that can create an ambiguity in the contract. In a recent case dealing with an investment contract, discussed here, that’s exactly what happened. The contract allowed investors to exercise an option to return their equity in exchange for a refund of their investment but the contract didn’t contain an expiration date on when the option must be exercised. The investors tried to exercise the option two years later leading to a dispute as to whether that was a “reasonable time.” This is because the lack of clarity regarding this temporal fact led to a latent ambiguity meaning it was a question of fact as to whether the investors exercising the option two years later was reasonable under the circumstances. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com