BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction expert witness Mccone County Montana institutional building expert witness Mccone County Montana housing expert witness Mccone County Montana tract home expert witness Mccone County Montana high-rise construction expert witness Mccone County Montana mid-rise construction expert witness Mccone County Montana retail construction expert witness Mccone County Montana office building expert witness Mccone County Montana Medical building expert witness Mccone County Montana casino resort expert witness Mccone County Montana custom homes expert witness Mccone County Montana structural steel construction expert witness Mccone County Montana industrial building expert witness Mccone County Montana Subterranean parking expert witness Mccone County Montana parking structure expert witness Mccone County Montana multi family housing expert witness Mccone County Montana townhome construction expert witness Mccone County Montana condominiums expert witness Mccone County Montana concrete tilt-up expert witness Mccone County Montana condominium expert witness Mccone County Montana hospital construction expert witness Mccone County Montana custom home expert witness Mccone County Montana
    Mccone County Montana construction cost estimating expert witnessMccone County Montana expert witness windowsMccone County Montana consulting general contractorMccone County Montana expert witness concrete failureMccone County Montana expert witness structural engineerMccone County Montana construction defect expert witnessMccone County Montana slope failure expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Mccone County, 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 Mccone County 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
    Home Builders Association of Great Falls
    Local # 2744
    600 6th St NW Ste 5
    Great Falls, MT 59404
    Mccone County Montana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Missoula Building Industry Association
    Local # 2788
    1840 S Ave W
    Missoula, MT 59801

    Mccone County Montana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Mccone County Montana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Mccone County Montana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Flathead Building Assoc.
    Local # 2790
    21 W Reserve Dr
    Kalispell, MT 59901

    Mccone County Montana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Mccone County Montana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Mccone County Montana


    JAMS Announces Updated Construction Rules

    Sustainability Is an Ever-Increasing Issue in Development

    Claim for Consequential Damages Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Construction Law Firm Opens in D.C.

    Hoboken Mayor Admits Defeat as Voters Reject $241 Million School

    Courts Take Another Swipe at the Implied Warranty of the Plans and Specifications

    Foreclosing Junior Lienholders and Recording A Lis Pendens

    Insurance Broker Stole NY Contractor's Payment, Indictment Alleges

    A Deep Dive Into an Undervalued Urban Marvel

    An Architect Uses AI to Explore Surreal Black Worlds

    Rent Increases During the Coronavirus Emergency Part II: Avoiding Violations Under California’s Anti-Price Gouging Statute

    The Miller Act Explained

    Sanctions Award Against Pro Se Plaintiff Upheld

    Illinois Supreme Court Rules Labor Costs Not Depreciated to Determine Actual Cash Value

    South Carolina Supreme Court Finds that Consequential Damage Arise From "Occurrence"

    Summary Judgment in Favor of General Contractor Under Privette Doctrine Overturned: Lessons Learned

    A Permitting Base Checklist for Data Centers and Power Plants

    Nevada Senate Rejects Construction Defect Bill

    Structural Defects Lead Schools to Close off Areas

    Form Contracts are Great, but. . .

    The Risk of A Fixed Price Contract Is The Market

    SNC-Lavalin’s Former Head of Construction Pleads Guilty to Bribery, Money Laundering

    Traub Lieberman Partner Adam Joffe Named to 2022 Emerging Lawyers List

    Counsel Investigating Coverage Can be Sued for Invasion of Privacy

    Insurer's Motion to Compel Inspection Denied

    Colorado Supreme Court Rules that Developers Retain Perpetual Control over Construction Defect Covenants

    HOA Foreclosure Excess Sale Proceeds Go to Owner

    Federal Court in New York Court Dismisses Civil Authority Claim for COVID-19 Coverage

    A Court-Side Seat: Citizen Suits, “Facility” Management and Some Nuance for Your Hazard Ranking

    Could You Be More Specific . . . About My Excess AI Coverage?

    Top 10 Take-Aways from the 2024 Annual Forum Meeting in New Orleans

    Cape Town Seeks World Cup Stadium Construction Collusion Damages

    When a Construction Lender Steps into the Shoes of the Developer, the Door is Open for Claims by the General Contractor

    Everybody Is Going to End Up Paying for Texas' Climate Crisis

    Construction Executives Expect Improvements in the Year Ahead

    California’s High Speed Rail Project. Are We Done With the Drama?

    Broker's Motion for Summary Judgment on Negligence Claim Denied

    Women Make Slow Entry into Building Trades

    What is Bad Faith?

    The OFCCP’s November 2019 Updated Technical Assistance Guide: What Every Federal Construction Contractor Should Know

    West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar Announced for 2014

    Denial of Coverage for Bulge in Wall Upheld

    Design Immunity Does Not Shield Public Entity From Claim That it Failed to Warn of a Dangerous Condition

    Georgia Court of Appeals Holds That Insurer Must Defend Oil Company Against Entire Lawsuit

    Chinese Demand Rush for Australia Homes to Stay, Ausin Says

    Midview Board of Education Lawsuit Over Construction Defect Repairs

    In Hong Kong, You Can Find a Home Where the Buffalo Roam

    Faulty Workmanship may be an Occurrence in Indiana CGL Policies

    Excess Insurer On The Hook For Cleanup Costs At Seven Industrial Sites

    Traub Lieberman Team Obtains Summary Judgment in Favor of Client Under Florida’s Newly Implemented Summary Judgment Standard
    Corporate Profile

    MCCONE COUNTY MONTANA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Mccone County, Montana 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 Mccone County'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
    Mccone County, Montana

    Micromobility in Smart Cities: Keeping the Wheels in Motion

    May 26, 2026 —
    Mobility is the lifeblood of any city. How people are able to travel in, out and within a metropolitan area is vital to its citizens, businesses, supply chains and social services. And as U.S. cities have expanded in size and population density, the strategies for addressing mobility have evolved. Many have taken different approaches to public transit, and each city boasts a dense tapestry of roadways, walking paths and various parking options. But as cities continue to reexamine infrastructure strategies through smart city technology, a new field of transportation has emerged—micromobility. Designed for short-distance travel using lightweight vehicles (bikes, e-bikes, e-scooters, etc.), the industry’s global net worth has grown exponentially in recent years to the tune of hundreds of billions, with one forecast predicting it could reach $340 billion by 2030. Micromobility also finds itself at the forefront of various smart city technological improvements. Geofencing has been implemented in U.S. cities to determine where micromobility vehicles can operate, control speed limits, and park utilizing the vehicles’ GPS location. Internet of Things (IoT) technologies (satellite-based location receivers, cloud communication, internet links, etc.) have improved vehicle lifespans by keeping track of when vehicles require service and prevent vandalism and theft. Data collected from vehicles’ location tracking is routinely used for urban planning and smart city development. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James P. Bobotek, Pillsbury
    Mr. Bobotek may be contacted at james.bobotek@pillsburylaw.com

    Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith Practice Earns Prestigious Band One Ranking in the Chambers USA 2026 Guide

    June 22, 2026 —
    White and Williams LLP's Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith Practice Group is pleased to share that it has received a Band One ranking in the Chambers USA 2026 Guide for Insurance, Pennsylvania. Additionally, Patricia B. Santelle, Chair Emeritus, Randy Maniloff, Partner, and Robert Walsh, Partner have all been individually ranked on the Chambers USA 2026 Guide in Insurance in Pennsylvania. The Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith Practice's consistent focus on their clients and handling of complex claims were just two of the attributes contributing to their elite Band One ranking, after 11 years on the Chambers USA list. When asked about their experience working with White and Williams’ Pennsylvania Insurance Practice, one client stated, “What distinguishes White and Williams is the high level of service and accountability. The team is responsive, organized and reliable, which allows our internal teams to move quickly and make informed decisions with confidence.” Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    Ayushi Neogi Published in ADC Defense Comment on Arbitration in Evolving Plaintiff-Friendly Landscape

    May 12, 2026 —
    Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani Senior Counsel Ayushi Neogi has authored an article in the Association of Defense Counsel of Northern California and Nevada’s Defense Comment magazine examining the shifting landscape of arbitration following the Ending Forced Arbitration Act. Titled “Compelling Arbitration in a Post-Ending Forced Arbitration Act, Plaintiff-Friendly Landscape,” the article analyzes how recent legislative changes are reshaping arbitration strategy, particularly as employees gain greater ability to bypass arbitration in certain claims. Neogi provides practical insight into how courts are responding and what this means for defense counsel navigating increasingly complex and plaintiff-friendly environments. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani

    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

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s Orange County Team for Securing a Strong MSJ Result in a Residential Gas Explosion Matter!

    May 14, 2026 —
    Huge Congratulations to Partner Kevin Wheeler and Associate Lindsey Wells for securing a strong result on a Motion for Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication filed on behalf of their client, the City of Murrieta. This was a complex, multi-party matter arising from a residential gas leak and explosion, where Plaintiffs alleged the City and MFPD failed to properly respond to the incident. After multiple complaints were consolidated and extensive defense work narrowed the case, eighteen plaintiffs remained asserting five causes of action against the City, prompting a comprehensive MSJ/MSA targeting liability, causation, and damages. The Court’s ruling reflects a significant win, particularly on the immunity framework. The Court eliminated the core negligence and assumed-duty claims arising from fire protection and emergency response activities. It further disposed of the misrepresentation and public nuisance claims. At the end of the day, three plaintiffs were dismissed entirely for failure to comply with Government Claims Act requirements, further reducing the scope of the case. While the dangerous condition claim remains, it does so in a very limited posture. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    When Your Scheduler Hallucinates: Managing AI Risk on the Job Site

    March 03, 2026 —
    Artificial intelligence has moved from the conference room to the construction site. Contractors are using AI-powered tools to predict schedule delays, monitor safety through drone footage, optimize equipment maintenance and flag potential hazards in real time. These tools deliver genuine efficiency gains, but they also introduce risks that most construction contracts do not anticipate and many project teams aren’t yet equipped to manage. The problem is that AI tools are probabilistic and not determinative, meaning that they can “hallucinate”: generating confident, but completely wrong, information. Your AI scheduling software might therefore predict a delay that never materializes, causing unnecessary resource mobilization. Your drone monitoring might flag a nonexistent safety hazard, stopping work and costing productivity. Or worse, it might miss a real hazard entirely. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason Loring, Jones Walker LLP
    Mr. Loring may be contacted at jloring@joneswalker.com

    Applying Jury Verdict Method in Quantifying Damages Due to Defective Specifications

    March 31, 2026 —
    An older case deals with three important considerations: (1) defective specifications; (2) whether the defective specifications were misleading or misrepresentative; and (3) applying the jury verdict method in quantifying damages. In Metric Construction Co., Inc. v. U.S., 80 Fed. Cl. 178 (Fed. Cl. 2008), a contractor was contracted by the federal government to construct a warehouse. There were defects in the structural steel design specifications underlying the standing seam metal roof installed by the contractor and, as a result, the roof system leaked causing damage. The contractor incurred significant costs in repairing the damage, and pursued recovery of these costs against the government. The contractor claimed the structural steel design serving as the framework for the metal roof was defective and misleading and caused the leaks. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Nomos LLP Partner Garret Murai Recognized by Super Lawyers

    July 13, 2026 —
    Nomos LLP Partner Garret Murai has been recognized as a 2026 Northern California Super Lawyer honoree in the area of Construction Litigation. This is the thirteenth consecutive year he has been recognized by Super Lawyers. Super Lawyers, an annual listing of outstanding lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high degree of peer recognition and personal achievement, is limited to no more than five percent (5%) of lawyers in a state who are selected through a multiphase process that includes a statewide survey of lawyers, independent research evaluation and peer reviews by practice area. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret D. Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com