BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominium expert witness Gold Hill Oregon townhome construction expert witness Gold Hill Oregon hospital construction expert witness Gold Hill Oregon custom home expert witness Gold Hill Oregon tract home expert witness Gold Hill Oregon Subterranean parking expert witness Gold Hill Oregon parking structure expert witness Gold Hill Oregon structural steel construction expert witness Gold Hill Oregon industrial building expert witness Gold Hill Oregon condominiums expert witness Gold Hill Oregon housing expert witness Gold Hill Oregon production housing expert witness Gold Hill Oregon mid-rise construction expert witness Gold Hill Oregon office building expert witness Gold Hill Oregon institutional building expert witness Gold Hill Oregon multi family housing expert witness Gold Hill Oregon Medical building expert witness Gold Hill Oregon concrete tilt-up expert witness Gold Hill Oregon high-rise construction expert witness Gold Hill Oregon casino resort expert witness Gold Hill Oregon landscaping construction expert witness Gold Hill Oregon low-income housing expert witness Gold Hill Oregon
    Gold Hill Oregon building envelope expert witnessGold Hill Oregon forensic architectGold Hill Oregon construction expert witness consultantGold Hill Oregon engineering consultantGold Hill Oregon structural engineering expert witnessesGold Hill Oregon building expertGold Hill Oregon building consultant expert
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Gold Hill, Oregon

    Oregon Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: (HB 2525 Chap. 701; HB2389) If an owner sends a builder a notice of defect within the time allowed for the owner to commence a court action against that contractor, the time for the owner to commence the action shall be extended, notwithstanding any statute of limitation or statute of ultimate repose, until the later of 120 days after written receipt of builders intention to repair, replace the defect, make monetary compensation or reject the claim. Upon receipt of notice, builder has 14 days to inspect the alleged defect. They then have no more than 90 days to communicate their intention The homebuyer must respond to the builder response within 30 days of receipt. The law requires builder notifies homebuyer of NOR before purchase.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Gold Hill Oregon

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Klamath Basin Home Builders Association
    Local # 3855
    205 Riverside Drive Ste G
    Klamath Falls, OR 97601

    Gold Hill Oregon Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Jackson County
    Local # 3836
    1006 E Jackson St
    Medford, OR 97504

    Gold Hill Oregon Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Josephine Cty Oregon
    Local # 3848
    223 NE B St Ste B
    Grants Pass, OR 97526

    Gold Hill Oregon Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Curry County Home Builders Association
    Local # 3851
    PO Box 1689
    Brookings, OR 97415
    Gold Hill Oregon Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Umpqua Valley Home Builders Association
    Local # 3816
    3000 Stewart Parkway Suite 206
    Roseburg, OR 97471

    Gold Hill Oregon Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Southwestern Oregon
    Local # 3888
    PO Box 696
    Coos Bay, OR 97420

    Gold Hill Oregon Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Central Oregon Builders Association
    Local # 3810
    61396 S Hwy 97 Ste 203
    Bend, OR 97702

    Gold Hill Oregon Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Gold Hill Oregon


    Defense Victory in Breach of Fiduciary Action

    Georgia Court of Appeals Holds That Policyholder Can “Stack” the Limits of Each Primary Policy After Asbestos Claim

    A Primer on Suspension and Debarment for Federal Construction Projects

    The Problem With Building a New City From Scratch

    Remodel Gets Pricey for Town

    Integration Can Inoculate in Utah

    Antitrust Walker Process Claims Not Covered Under Personal Injury Coverage for Malicious Prosecution

    Kahana & Feld P.C. Enhances Client Offerings, Expands Litigation Firm Leadership

    Michigan Court Waives Goodbye to Subrogation Claims, Except as to Gross Negligence

    Crime Policy Insurance Quotes Falsely Represented the Scope of its Coverage

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

    Making the World’s Longest Undersea Railway Tunnel Possible with BIM

    Construction Defect Coverage Summary 2013: The Business Risks Shift To Insurers

    The Future of Construction Work with Mark Ehrlich

    Scaffolding Purchase Suggests No New Building for Board of Equalization

    The Age of Uncertainty: Monitoring Construction Policy Shifts

    Under the Hood of U.S. Construction Spending Is Revised Data

    Tarriffs, a Pandemic and War: Construction Contracts Must Withstand the Unforeseeable

    A Word to the Wise about Construction Defects

    Attorneys' Fee Clauses are Engraved Invitations to Sue

    Lack of Flood Insurance for New York’s Poorest Residents

    FDOT Races to Re-Open Storm-Damaged Pensacola Bridge

    How AB5 has Changed the Employment Landscape

    No Duty to Defend Under Pollution Policy

    Is an Initial Decision Maker, Project Neutral, or Dispute Resolution Board Right for You?

    Introducing Nomos LLP!

    Incorporate Sustainability in Building Design to Meet Green Construction Goals

    Pending Sales of U.S. Existing Homes Increase 0.8% in November

    A Quick Checklist for Subcontractors

    Short-Term Rental Legislation & Litigation On the Way!

    Economic Loss Rule Bars Claims Against Manufacturer

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s 2023 Mountain States Super Lawyers Rising Stars!

    Court Holds That Public Entity Can Unilaterally Replace Subcontractor Under California’s Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act

    Los Angeles Seeks Speedier Way to Build New Affordable Homes

    Homeowner Sues Brick Manufacturer for Spalling Bricks

    Why You Should Consider “In House Counsel”

    Brief Overview of Rights of Unlicensed Contractors in California

    Anatomy of a Construction Dispute- A Wrap Up

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (10/29/25) – Office Market Bounces Back, Senate Passes ROAD to Housing Act, and CRE Embraces Blockchain

    Using the Prevention Doctrine

    Administration Seeks To Build New FBI HQ on Current D.C. Site

    Beyond the Disneyland Resort: World Class Shopping Experiences

    When Do Hard-Nosed Negotiations Become Coercion? Or, When Should You Feel Unlucky?

    Ohio School Board and Contractor Meet to Discuss Alleged Defects

    Missouri Protects Subrogation Rights

    New York Court Discusses Evidentiary Standards for Policy Rescission Based on Material Misrepresentation

    Lien Actions Versus Lien Foreclosure Actions

    Circuit Court Supports Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product Protections in Connection with Internal Investigations

    Californians Swarm Few Listings Cuts to Affordable Homes

    Novation Agreements Under Federal Contracts
    Corporate Profile

    GOLD HILL OREGON CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Gold Hill, Oregon 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
    Gold Hill, Oregon

    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

    Snell & Wilmer Recognized With Top Honor in Ranking Arizona: Top Law Firms for 2026

    June 22, 2026 —
    PHOENIX – Snell & Wilmer is pleased to announce that the firm has been voted as the top law firm in Arizona for the 17th consecutive year in the 2026 edition of AZ Big Media’s Ranking Arizona: The Best of Arizona Business. The firm was again recognized in the category of “Top 10 large law firms in Arizona” which looked at firms with 39 attorneys or more. “We are honored to receive this award recognizing our team’s ongoing commitment to excellence in service of our clients, our community, and each other,” said Firm Chair Barbara J. Dawson. “We are proud to play a meaningful role in supporting the strength and growth of Arizona’s vibrant business environment amid a rapidly changing global economy.” Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Snell & Wilmer

    2026 Top Business Risks for Construction and Engineering Companies

    May 26, 2026 —
    The 2026 Allianz Risk Barometer revealed some surprising findings for construction and engineering businesses. Now in its fifteenth year, this annual business risk ranking by corporate insurer Allianz Commercial incorporates the views of 3,338 global risk management professionals on the main perils on their radar for the year. Survey respondents included construction and engineering risk experts who identified the threats keeping them up at night. Here is how they ranked the top industry risks for 2026: Natural Catastrophes Natural catastrophe risk retains the top spot, with 38% of construction and engineering respondents citing this risk as their leading concern for 2026. From the insurance perspective, economic and insured losses remained high, albeit lower than the 10-year average. The evolving nature of natural catastrophes continues to pose significant challenges to businesses and the (re)insurance industry. Insured losses from natural catastrophes are set to reach $107 billion for 2025, according to Swiss Re—the sixth year in a row they have exceeded $100 billion, while economic losses are well in excess of $200 billion. Reprinted courtesy of Darren Tasker, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

    Communication Gaps Can Cost Construction Firms in the Data Center Boom

    June 02, 2026 —
    The data center construction boom is transforming the construction industry at a historic pace. Fueled by cloud computing, artificial intelligence and relentless demand for digital infrastructure, data centers have become one of the fastest-growing project types in the built environment. Billions of dollars are flowing into new facilities and expansions, creating unprecedented opportunities for construction firms positioned to deliver reliably. But opportunity alone does not guarantee success. As competition intensifies, communication failures and poor information management are emerging as some of the most common (and costly) reasons firms lose margins, miss deadlines or fail to secure repeat work. In data center construction, where schedules are compressed and tolerance for error is minimal, even small breakdowns in communication can have outsized consequences. Reprinted courtesy of Mike Lewis, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

    Over 50 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys Recognized in 7th Edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America

    September 01, 2026 —
    56 Lewis Brisbois attorneys across 26 offices have been named to the 7th edition of “Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America.” Congratulations to the following attorneys on this recognition! You can see the full list of Lewis Brisbois attorneys named to Best Lawyers' 33rd edition of The Best Lawyers in America here. Akron, OH
    • Partner Meleah M. Skillern - Commercial Litigation
    Atlanta, GA
    • Partner Catherine Crawley - Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants; and Transportation Law
    • Associate Davis Lackey - Insurance Law; and Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Turnover Traps for Community Associations: Investigate First, Release Claims Later

    April 14, 2026 —
    Turnover of a community association from developer control to owner control is a uniquely vulnerable moment. Developers are increasingly presenting Florida condominium and homeowners’ associations with “standard” settlement or release agreements at turnover, often being framed as routine steps to finalize the transition of control. In reality, these agreements can have sweeping consequences, including the release of construction-defect claims before the association has conducted any meaningful independent evaluation. The developer has years of project knowledge and access to plans, subcontractors, and internal records. The newly elected board is just beginning to organize, obtain documents, and understand the property’s condition. Many defects, especially those involving roofing, waterproofing, windows, or structural components, are latent and not yet visible. Signing a release at this stage means the association is making a binding decision under conditions of uncertainty, without full information, to release all future potential claims. Over the last few years, there has been a rise in reports of developers offering a packaged deal: they agree to complete certain repairs, often minor punch-list or cosmetic items, and to “forgive” an alleged financial deficit (often around $50,000) supposedly owed by the association from the developer-control period. In exchange, the association is asked to sign a broad release covering all claims, including known and unknown construction defects. To a new HOA board that received their community with limited operating and reserve funds, they are left with a difficult decision to either accept the developer’s offer or assess their owners to pay this alleged debt. These agreements are occasionally presented through community management companies, which may describe them as “standard” or "routine.” Whether due to misunderstanding or influence from the developer, management companies can unintentionally reinforce the idea that signing is expected. Any recommendation provided to HOAs about whether to sign these releases could open community management to liability down the road. The best practice for both associations and community managers is to refer any agreements to be reviewed by general counsel for the association. The following two case studies illustrate the real-world consequences: Case Study One: A newly transitioned board relies on its management company to negotiate with the developer-builder to resolve irrigation issues, pond concerns, and signage deficiencies, along with forgiving an asserted financial shortfall. In exchange, the board signs a broad release covering all claims, including latent defects. Within a year, several punch-list items remain incomplete, and more serious issues arise. When the association demands completion, the developer delays, prompting the association to seek advice on how to enforce the settlement agreement. The association hires counsel to hold the developer responsible for both the previously agreed-upon items and newly identified construction defects. However, when the association brings claims against the developer, the developer points to the release of all potential construction defects in the community. Thus, the only remaining remedy is limited to enforcement of the specific punch-list terms. The community, still relatively new, has no viable claims against the developer-builder for the construction defects. With warranties expired and the release, the association must fund repairs through special assessments, despite defects that would otherwise have been actionable. Case Study Two: A community is presented with a similar agreement as above. The management company encourages execution, suggesting it is standard and even telling the board to “name your price.” The developer also pressures the newly elected board to sign. Instead of signing, the board consults with their attorney. Counsel advises the board not to sign the release and recommends further investigation. Engineers are retained and identify early indicators of broader issues, including stucco cracking, water intrusion, and irrigation deficiencies. Based on this information, the association declines to sign the release. Subsequent evaluation reveals potentially significant construction-defect claims, allowing the community to pursue recovery that would have been lost under the proposed agreement. These scenarios underscore a fundamental point: signing a release at turnover is not an administrative formality—it is a major legal decision. Board members act in a fiduciary capacity on behalf of their community, and their decisions can bind all current and future owners. At turnover, an association’s right is to investigate and pursue claims. Preserving that right until a full and independent evaluation is completed is not adversarial—it is responsible governance. Accordingly, associations should retain independent evaluations of the property and consult qualified legal counsel before signing any “standard” agreements, especially ones involving a release of future claims. Nicholas B. Vargo is a partner in Ball Janik LLP’s Construction Practice Group. He may be reached at nvargo@balljanik.com.

    Hidden Risks Behind Today’s Stadium Construction Boom

    July 20, 2026 —
    After a decade-plus lull, professional sports leagues, universities and municipalities are once again spending heavily on new stadiums and major renovations. In the NFL alone, multiple marquee projects are underway or planned, representing more than $10 billion in facilities and mixed-use entertainment districts, rivaling or exceeding the scale of development during the last stadium-build cycle of the early 2000s. Beneath the excitement of architectural ambition and civic pride lies a risk landscape that has fundamentally changed since the last wave of stadium construction. Teams, cities and contractors that rely on outdated assumptions may find themselves exposed to cost overruns, schedule delays and liabilities that are far more difficult to unwind once construction is underway. Reprinted courtesy of Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

    Insufficient Notice of Commencement and Construction Lien Rights

    August 03, 2026 —
    When a party is preserving their construction lien rights, the party will look to the recorded Notice of Commencement. This is the recorded document that provides the lienor with the information for purposes of preserving construction lien rights. A Notice to Owner company will typically rely on the Notice of Commencement to serve Notices to Owners from lower tiers not in contract with the owner. However, when it comes to preparing the lien, a lienor should look beyond just the Notice of Commencement and also look to the property appraiser’s website as a backstop. In a recent case, a window company had the homeowner sign the Notice of Commencement and then filled in the information. The company naturally did this for the convenience of the homeowner that probably was unfamiliar with the Notice of Commencement process. Regardless, information in the Notice of Commencement was inaccurate. It failed to include all the real property owners. Thus, when a payment dispute arose and a construction lien was prepared, it did not identify all of the real property owners. All of the real property owners were added later during the pendency of a lien foreclosure lawsuit. The trial court denied the lien because of the defective / insufficient Notice of Commencement — the lienor assumed the risk of error by filling out the information in the Notice of Commencement. The trial court further denied the lien holding that because the work did not commence within 90 days of the Notice of Commencement, the Notice of Commencement is void. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com