BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing expert witness Binford North Dakota custom homes expert witness Binford North Dakota landscaping construction expert witness Binford North Dakota hospital construction expert witness Binford North Dakota Medical building expert witness Binford North Dakota condominiums expert witness Binford North Dakota mid-rise construction expert witness Binford North Dakota multi family housing expert witness Binford North Dakota high-rise construction expert witness Binford North Dakota casino resort expert witness Binford North Dakota office building expert witness Binford North Dakota industrial building expert witness Binford North Dakota structural steel construction expert witness Binford North Dakota institutional building expert witness Binford North Dakota low-income housing expert witness Binford North Dakota condominium expert witness Binford North Dakota parking structure expert witness Binford North Dakota custom home expert witness Binford North Dakota retail construction expert witness Binford North Dakota tract home expert witness Binford North Dakota townhome construction expert witness Binford North Dakota production housing expert witness Binford North Dakota
    Binford North Dakota window expert witnessBinford North Dakota hospital construction expert witnessBinford North Dakota ada design expert witnessBinford North Dakota architect expert witnessBinford North Dakota construction expert testimonyBinford North Dakota construction defect expert witnessBinford North Dakota expert witnesses fenestration
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Binford, North Dakota

    North Dakota Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: (HB1437) Notice required six months prior to undertaking any repair other than emergency repair, or instituting action for breach of warranty of one or two-family dwelling; response time 30 days.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Binford North Dakota

    A contractor's license is required for all jobs over $2,000.00. Separate boards license plumbing and electrical trades.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Forx Builders Association
    Local # 3515
    519 DeMers Ave
    Grand Forks, ND 58201

    Binford North Dakota Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Williston Area Builders Association
    Local # 3520
    PO Box 1825
    Williston, ND 58802
    Binford North Dakota Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Minot Association of Bldrs
    Local # 3565
    PO Box 1851
    Minot, ND 58702

    Binford North Dakota Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    North Dakota AB
    Local # 3500
    1720 Burnt Boat Dr Ste 207
    Bismarck, ND 58503

    Binford North Dakota Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Bismarck-Mandan Home Builders Association
    Local # 3510
    2600 Gateway Ave Ste 1
    Bismarck, ND 58503

    Binford North Dakota Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Dickinson Area Home Builders Association
    Local # 3512
    PO Box 1697
    Dickinson, ND 58602
    Binford North Dakota Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Fargo-Moorhead
    Local # 3545
    1802 32nd Ave S
    Fargo, ND 58103

    Binford North Dakota Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Binford North Dakota


    Deleted Emails Cost Company $3M in Sanctions

    Additional Insured Secures Defense Under Subcontractor's Policy

    Updates to the CEQA Guidelines Have Been Finalized

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Faulty Workmanship Claim

    Bert L. Howe & Associates Celebrates 21-Year Success Story

    Wall Failure Due to Construction Defect Says Insurer

    Federal Judge Strikes Down CDC’s COVID-19 Eviction Moratorium

    Efficient Proximate Cause Applies to Policy's Collapse Provisions

    Sacramento Army Corps District Projects Get $2.1 Billion in Supplemental Appropriation

    Understanding the Miller Act

    20 Years of BHA at West Coast Casualty's CD Seminar: Chronicling BHA's Innovative Exhibits

    Additional Insured Status Survives Summary Judgment Stage

    US Supreme Court Orders All Mountain Valley Gas Line Work to Proceed

    Hawaii Building Codes to Stay in State Control

    Federal Court Sets High Bar for Pleading Products Liability Cases in New Jersey

    Professional Services Exclusion Bars Coverage Where Ordinary Negligence is Inseparably Intertwined With Professional Service

    Claim for Consequential Damages Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Florida Lien Law and Substantial Compliance vs. Strict Compliance

    Spain’s Sagrada Familia: Contemporary Construction Methods Speed Iconic Basilica to Completion

    Meet the Forum's In-House Counsel: KATE GOLDEN

    Suppliers of Inherently Dangerous Raw Materials Remain Excluded from the Protections of the Component Parts Doctrine

    Boston Developer Sues Contractor Alleging Delays That Cost Millions

    Improvements to AIA Contracts?

    A Lot of Cheap Housing Is About to Get Very Expensive

    Couple Sues for Construction Defects in Manufactured Home

    Be Careful with Good Faith Payments

    Southern California Lost $8 Billion in Construction Wages

    LA Lakers Partially Survive Motion to Dismiss COVID-19 Claims

    Understanding the Details: Suing Architects and Engineers Can Get Technical

    Penalty for Failure to Release Expired Liens

    Judge Rejects Extrapolation, Harmon Tower to Remain Standing

    Performance Bond Primer: Need to Knows and Need to Dos

    Court Conditionally Grants Mandamus Relief to Compel Appraisal

    Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Case Cannot Be Overturned While Facts Are Still in Contention in Related Cases

    Colorado HB 13-1090: Concerning Payment of Amounts Due Under a Construction Agreement

    Contractor Dispute Resolution Framework and Prevention

    Is It Time to Get Rid of Retainage?

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “I Never Had a Chance”

    Contractor Entitled to Continued Defense Against Allegations of Faulty Construction

    Arguing Cardinal Change is Different than Proving Cardinal Change

    Sources of Insurance Recovery for Emerging PFAS Claims

    David McLain Recognized Among the 2021 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America© for Construction Law

    Background Owner of Property Cannot Be Compelled to Arbitrate Construction Defects

    Damron Agreement Questioned in Colorado Casualty Insurance v Safety Control Company, et al.

    Planned Everglades Reservoir at Center of Spat Between Fla.'s Gov.-Elect, Water Management District

    The COVID-19 Impact: Navigating the Legal Landscape’s New Normal

    Contractor Allegedly Injured after Slipping on Black Ice Files Suit

    Coping With The New Cap And Trade Law

    “To Indemnify, or Not to Indemnify, that is the Question: California Court of Appeal Addresses Active Negligence in Indemnity Provisions”

    CSLB Joint Venture Licenses – Providing Contractors With The Means To Expand Their Businesses
    Corporate Profile

    BINFORD NORTH DAKOTA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Binford, North Dakota Construction Expert Witness Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Binford, North Dakota

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (7/8/26) – Data Centers Negotiate Flexibility for Speed, Hotel Deal Activities Focus on Luxury, and DC Sues Apartment Owners

    July 20, 2026 —
    In our latest roundup, rail projects gain steam across the U.S., AI optimizes building operations, a modular approach speeds data center construction, and more!
    • Hyperscalers want their data centers online, and utilities want to provide interconnections, but both are still looking for common operating guidelines. (Herman K. Trabish, Construction Dive)
    • Contractors are taking advantage of multibillion-dollar train and transit contracts, even as funding challenges create hurdles for project execution. (Matthew Thibault, Construction Dive)
    • Although hospitality and leisure M&A deal volume was down 2.5% in the first half of 2026 compared to the prior six months, investors are concentrating on the upper end of the market, including luxury hotels, wellness resorts and gaming, or “data-rich,” platforms. (Noor Adatia, Hotel Dive)
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Insurer Dispenses with Bad Faith Claim on Summary Judgment

    June 22, 2026 —
    The court granted the insurer’s motion for partial summary judgment because the insured failed to present evidence that the insurer failed to conduct a reasonable investigation. PSY Burger, LLC v. State Farm General Insurance Company, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66991(C.D. Cal. March 20, 2026). The insured’s commercial property suffered heavy damage from tropical storm Hilary. State Farm denied coverage to repair the damage. The insured sued State Farm alleging breach of contract and bad faith due to an inadequate investigation. Apparently, the insured did not retain an expert to opine on claims handling. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    AI in AEC 2026: Doing AI Right and Rethinking Your Business Model

    April 08, 2026 —
    The sixth AI at the AEC 2026 conference showcased the evolution of AI discussions. There were, naturally, many talks about software and technologies. But more than before, there were conversations about realizing AI’s business value. Two themes appeared in nearly every session I attended. First, many companies struggle with AI adoption, not because they lack tools, but because their thinking isn’t right. Second, when AI works, it disrupts the business model that brought them there. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Ninth Circuit Holds That Policies Covering Environmental Claims Do Not Have Aggregate Limits

    May 12, 2026 —
    In the case of County of San Bernardino v. Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania, the Ninth Circuit recently addressed the issue of whether general liability policies issued in the 1960s and 1970s included aggregate limits for claims arising under the premises-operations coverage in CGL policies. The difference between the policyholder’s interpretation of the policies’ limits clauses and the insurer’s interpretation was worth hundreds of millions of dollars in exposure for the insurer. The Court closely examined the policy language and extrinsic evidence from both the insurance industry’s drafting history and the parties before concluding that the policies were ambiguous. The Court construed that ambiguity in favor of the policyholder and ruled that aggregate limits did not apply to the claims at issue. The Court’s decision underscores the importance of carefully examining a policy’s limits, especially for older policies written before 1986 when the insurance industry revised the standard-form CGL policy to state the aggregate limits apply not only to products liability claims but to premises-operations claims as well. Decades of insurance industry drafting history confirms, as the policyholder’s submissions in this case indicate, that the industry well understood that operations claims like the environmental waste-disposal claims at issue here typically were not subject to aggregate limits. Reprinted courtesy of Lorelie S. Masters, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP and Joseph T. Niczky, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP Ms. Masters may be contacted at lmasters@hunton.com Mr. Niczky may be contacted at jniczky@hunton.com Read the full story...

    It’s More Than a Feeling: Proving Construction Damages and When You Should Hire an Expert to Help Do It

    July 27, 2026 —
    When you win a bid, you might be singing that everything is going your way. Then something goes wrong. The owner hands you defective plans, sits on RFI responses or other critical information, or otherwise upends the work. The costs pile up through no fault of your own. You feel wronged, and you want to be made whole. But a feeling that you got burned is not enough. To recover, that feeling has to become something the law recognizes as damages. So, what are damages, and how do you prove them? At bottom, contract damages are the money that puts the non-breaching party (i.e., the party that doesn’t breach the contract) in the position it would have occupied had the contract been performed. Reprinted courtesy of Bradley E. Sands, Jones Walker LLP and Katie McCracken, Summer Associate, University of Georgia School of Law Read the full story...
    Mr. Sands may be contacted at bsands@joneswalker.com

    Quick Note: Don’t Spoil Evidence!!!!

    March 10, 2026 —
    The phrase “spoliation of evidence” is a phrase that gets used, sometimes properly and sometimes improperly. The reason is that if evidence is legitimately spoiled, the opposing party wants an adverse inference jury instruction. There are two potential adverse inference jury instructions dealing with spoliation of evidence, neither of which are good, and one of which you definitely don’t want. A recent case discusses these jury instructions (check here) in a slip and fall personal injury case. The bottom line is that you need to preserve evidence relevant to a claim. Don’t lose it. Don’t intentionally destroy it. Don’t pretend it does not exist. Don’t do all the things that hinder the preservation and ultimate production of the relevant evidence. An adverse inference jury instruction (or an adverse inference implication in a non-jury trial) could be much, much worse. The facts are what the facts are. The best thing you can do is confront the facts. Confront the bad facts just like the good facts. The nature of any dispute is that there will be both good and bad facts. Bad facts can hopefully be explained recognizing there will be bad facts on the other side too. Sometimes, the bad facts warrant major strategic considerations and shifting the focus of how a dispute will be handled and presented. Whatever you do, don’t put yourself in a position where you are spoiling evidence. Once you get an adverse inference instruction, that’s it, as it’s very tough to overcome. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Fourth Circuit Extends Coverage to Contractor

    May 14, 2026 —
    The Fourth Circuit in APAC-Atlantic, Inc. v. Owners Insurance Co., No. 24-1969, 2026 WL 458402 (4th Cir. Feb. 18, 2026) recently endorsed broad coverage for additional insureds, interpreting “arising out of” broadly under North Carolina law to extend coverage to a repaving company under its subcontractor’s liability insurance policy. The court held that an additional insured’s liability “arising out of” a named insured’s work in an additional-insured endorsement means liability “relating to” or “causally connected to” the named insured’s operations, rather than liability defined more narrowly as “caused by” or “the fault of” the named insured. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

    GRSM Secures Illinois Appellate Victory for Architectural Firm in Implied Warranty Dispute

    May 14, 2026 —
    Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani Partner Jonathan Federman, Partner Thomas Cronin, and Senior Counsel Garrett Lee recently secured a victory in the Illinois Appellate Court, Fifth District, on behalf of the firm’s client, an architectural firm, in a liability dispute. The case arose following an entity’s purchase of a 111-unit building for use as an investment or rental property. The plaintiff made claims against the architect of the building, alleging that there were design defects that breached an implied warranty, as well as a negligence claim. GRSM argued that an architect could not be liable for implied warranties, particularly for an implied warranty which no Illinois court has ever recognized. GRSM further argued that Illinois law bars an architect from liability for negligence arising from a duty pursuant to contract under the economic loss doctrine. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani