BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction expert witness Lyons Oregon custom home expert witness Lyons Oregon office building expert witness Lyons Oregon hospital construction expert witness Lyons Oregon condominiums expert witness Lyons Oregon condominium expert witness Lyons Oregon townhome construction expert witness Lyons Oregon institutional building expert witness Lyons Oregon low-income housing expert witness Lyons Oregon housing expert witness Lyons Oregon production housing expert witness Lyons Oregon tract home expert witness Lyons Oregon Medical building expert witness Lyons Oregon structural steel construction expert witness Lyons Oregon mid-rise construction expert witness Lyons Oregon parking structure expert witness Lyons Oregon landscaping construction expert witness Lyons Oregon high-rise construction expert witness Lyons Oregon concrete tilt-up expert witness Lyons Oregon casino resort expert witness Lyons Oregon Subterranean parking expert witness Lyons Oregon multi family housing expert witness Lyons Oregon
    Lyons Oregon reconstruction expert witnessLyons Oregon construction code expert witnessLyons Oregon construction defect expert witnessLyons Oregon engineering consultantLyons Oregon construction scheduling expert witnessLyons Oregon architectural expert witnessLyons Oregon fenestration expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Lyons, 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 Lyons Oregon

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Baker County Chapter
    Local # 3802
    3470 10th St
    Baker City, OR 97814
    Lyons Oregon Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Marion and Polk Counties
    Local # 3878
    385 Taylor St NE
    Salem, OR 97301

    Lyons Oregon Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Oregon Home Builders Association
    Local # 3800
    375 Taylor St NE
    Salem, OR 97301

    Lyons Oregon Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Lincoln County Home Builders Association
    Local # 3858
    PO Box 440
    Tangent, OR 97389

    Lyons Oregon Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Willamette Valley Home Builders Association
    Local # 3805
    PO Box 440 32054 Old Hwy 34
    Tangent, OR 97389

    Lyons Oregon Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Metro Portland
    Local # 3862
    15555 SW Bangy Rd Ste 301
    Lake Oswego, OR 97035

    Lyons Oregon Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Lane County
    Local # 3824
    1065 River Rd
    Eugene, OR 97404

    Lyons Oregon Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Lyons Oregon


    Condo Collapse Spurs Hometown House Member to Demand U.S. Rules

    Richest NJ Neighborhood Fights Plan for Low-Cost Homes on Toxic Dump

    Structuring Water Resilience for Data Center Development: Water Rights, Reuse Incentives, and Emerging Disclosure Risk

    Nomos LLP Partner Garret Murai Recognized by Super Lawyers

    Excess Policy Triggered Once Retention Paid, Even if Loss Not Covered By Excess

    HOA Fines Capped at $100: Immediate Impact of California’s AB 130

    My Construction Law Wish List

    Important Environmental Insurance Ruling Issued In Protracted Insurance-Coverage Dispute

    Nancy Conrad Recognized in Lehigh Valley Business 2024 Power in Law List

    The Colorado Construction Defect Reform Act Explained

    The Louvre Abu Dhabi’s Mega-Structure Domed Roof Completed

    The Project “Completion” Paradox in California

    Replacing Coal Plants with Renewables Is Cheaper 80% of the Time

    Contractor Sues for $5.7M in Pay for Iowa Jail Project

    Parking Garage Partially Collapses in Dearborn, Mich., Trapping One

    Applying Jury Verdict Method in Quantifying Damages Due to Defective Specifications

    Illinois Federal Court Applies Insurer-Friendly “Mutual Exclusive Theories” Test To Independent Counsel Analysis

    Policy's Limitation Period for Seeking Replacement Costs Not Enforced Where Unreasonable

    Fort Lauderdale Team Secures Appellate Win Affirming Defense Verdict for Engineering Firm in High-Stakes Negligence Case

    Hyundai to Pay 47M to Settle Construction Equipment's Alleged Clean Air Violations

    Coverage for Injury to Insured’s Employee Not Covered

    Difference Between a Novation And A Modification to a Contract

    When Subcontractors Sue Only the Surety on Payment Bond and Tips for General Contractors

    Attorney Risks Disqualification If After Receiving Presumptively Privileged Communication Fails to Notify Privilege Holder and Uses Document Pending Privilege Determination by Court

    Risk Transfer: The Souffle of Construction Litigation

    Georgia Appellate Court Supports County Claim Against Surety Company’s Failure to Pay

    Kahana Feld Partner Noelle Natoli Named President of Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles

    Manhattan Condos at Half Price Reshape New York’s Harlem

    Carroll Brock of Larchmont Homes Dies at Age 88

    Why Construction Law- An Update

    Priority of Liability Insurance Coverage and Horizontal and Vertical Exhaustion

    Resulting Loss Claims Denied

    COVID-19 Information and Resources

    Not If, But When: Newly Enacted Virginia Legislation Bans “Pay-If-Paid” Clauses In Construction Contracts

    Spa High-Rise Residents Frustrated by Construction Defects

    There’s an Unusual Thing Happening in the Housing Market

    New York City Construction: Boom Times Again?

    Top 10 Take-Aways: the ABA Forum's 2024 Mid-Winter Meeting

    Lewis Brisbois Promotes 35 to Partnership

    Potential Construction Liabilities Contractors Need to Know

    Washington State Supreme Court Issues Landmark Decision on Spearin Doctrine

    Quick Note: Be Careful with Pay if Paid Clauses (Both Subcontractors and General Contractors)

    Persimmon Offers to Fix Risky Homes as Cladding Crisis Grows

    Mortgagors Seek Coverage Under Mortgagee's Policy

    FIFA Inspecting Brazil’s World Cup Stadiums

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (08/10/22)

    Randy Maniloff Recognized by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® as a "Lawyer of the Year"

    Expert Excluded After Never Viewing Damaged Property

    Illinois Town Sues over Construction Defects at Police Station

    No Duty to Indemnify Where No Duty to Defend
    Corporate Profile

    LYONS OREGON CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Lyons, Oregon 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. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Lyons' 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
    Lyons, Oregon

    Pulling the Plug, Preserving the Product: Protecting Rights to a Modular Subcontractor’s Work Post-Termination

    June 08, 2026 —
    Volumetric Modular Construction (VMC) is a building method where a structure is divided into large components or modules, fabricated in an offsite factory and then transported to a construction site for assembly.[1] Proponents of VMC hail it as a cost-efficient alternative to traditional building methods that leads to more consistent quality and shorter construction duration.[2] Due to a growing labor shortage, high demand for compressed project schedules, and stagnant construction productivity rates, the construction industry is embracing VMC.[3] A recent report on the market size of prefabricated construction estimates that from 2026 to 2031, VMC will grow at a compound annual growth rate of 7.16% and become a 413.11-billion-dollar industry.[4] As VMC becomes more prevalent, owners, general contractors, and subcontractors must consider how to effectively contract for modular construction. One important consideration, which this article focuses on, is navigating termination of a modular subcontractor. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Paul Williamson, Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Mr. Williamson may be contacted at pwilliamson@pecklaw.com

    Snell & Wilmer’s Orange County Office Recognized as One of the “Best Places to Work” by the Orange County Business Journal

    August 16, 2026 —
    ORANGE COUNTY – Snell & Wilmer is pleased to announce that its Orange County office has been selected as one of the 2026 “Best Places to Work in Orange County” by the Orange County Business Journal. This recognition honors outstanding employers that foster exceptional workplace cultures and demonstrate a strong commitment to employee engagement, professional development, and organizational excellence. The annual awards recognize Orange County employers that create positive workplace environments and set the standard for employee satisfaction and organizational success. Honorees are selected through a comprehensive evaluation process that includes confidential employee surveys and an independent assessment of company policies, practices, philosophy, systems, and demographics. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Snell & Wilmer

    HHMR Honored as a 2026 Denver Business Journal Best Places to Work Recipient

    March 10, 2026 —
    We are pleased to share that Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell has been named a 2026 Denver Business Journal Best Places to Work honoree, a recognition grounded entirely in direct feedback from our own team members. The Denver Business Journal Best Places to Work program, in partnership with Quantum Workplace, ranks organizations based on anonymous employee engagement survey results that measure culture, leadership, communication, trust, team dynamics, and satisfaction. This year’s list includes 65 companies across the Denver metropolitan area, judged by the people who know these workplaces best: their employees. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Cuomo Bridge Lawsuit Adversaries Weigh Mediated Settlement

    July 06, 2026 —
    Rival legal teams have reached a critical juncture as they consider a mediated settlement in one of two major payment lawsuits pending between a design-build contracting team and the New York State Thruway Authority over construction of the more than $3-billion Mario M. Cuomo Bridge north of New York City. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Richard Korman, Engineering News-Record
    Mr. Korman may be contacted at kormanr@enr.com

    Alert: Fraudulent Notice of Nonpayment Defense Applies to Payment Bond Claims

    April 27, 2026 —
    Under Florida’s Lien Law, there’s an affirmative defense or affirmative claim known as a “fraudulent lien.” The fraudulent lien defense or claim is set out in Florida Statute s. 713.31. This defense also extends to payment bond claims, whether under a private statutory payment bond (Florida Statute s. 713.23) or a public payment bond (Florida Statute s. 255.05), as it pertains to the notice of nonpayment. A notice of nonpayment needs to be served within 90 days from final furnishing to preserve a claimant’s rights against the bond. However, there really has not been a case, until now, that discusses a “fraudulent notice of nonpayment.” In K&M Electric Supply, Inc. v. Brown Electrical Solutions, LLC, 51 Fla.L.Weekly D672a (Fla. 4th DCA 2026), a prime contractor and surety prevailed at the trial level on their fraudulent notice of nonpayment defense based on a supplier’s notice of nonpayment and action against a public payment bond (under Florida Statute s. 255.05). Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    “He Chose…Poorly: How Bad DSC Clauses Lead to Project Doom in the Last Crusade of Construction Risk”

    March 10, 2026 —
    “We do not follow maps to buried treasure, and X never, ever marks the spot.” That’s the advice that Indiana Jones offered in the Last Crusade film. But what’s beneath the surface isn’t just important to adventure archaeologists. It has real-world application to our industry, where success depends on the stability of materials below the surface. The study of geology and soils has ancient roots. Egyptians relied on soil stability for the pyramids; Rome built a continent-wide roadway system utilizing subgrade preparation techniques; Medieval builders implemented a rudimentary foundation pier system; Henri Gautier studied what is now called the “angle of repose” for French retaining walls in the early 18th Century. Through the 19th Century, contractors bore the risk of the stability of their work, and the attendant peril of unforeseen site conditions. But in the early 20th Century, design trades continued to develop increased understanding of soil and underground conditions. In the 1920’s US federal contracts began employing “differing site conditions” clauses, which provided for cost/time adjustments if subsurface conditions differed from expectations. Industry forms followed the federal policy, and these clauses became almost universally accepted. Reprinted courtesy of Curt Martin, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Lee Banta, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@pecklaw.com Mr. Banta may be contacted at lbanta@pecklaw.com Read the full story...

    Moving in Before Substantial Completion? The Risks of Early Owner Occupancy

    March 24, 2026 —
    Introduction On many construction projects, particularly large projects facing schedule pressure, owners may begin occupying or using portions of the project before the work reaches substantial completion. This is often due to operational needs, phased turnover, or market demands that drive owners to take possession of all or part of a project while construction activities are ongoing. While early occupancy may seem practical, it can blur the lines of responsibility between owner and contractor and can create significant legal and practical complications. These disputes are especially common on large, complex projects where punch list work, system commissioning, and closeout activities overlap with owner use. Without clear documentation and carefully drafted contract provisions, early occupancy can undermine an owner’s ability to enforce completion requirements while simultaneously exposing the contractor to claims of delay, inefficiency, or interference. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sydney Koby, Jones Walker
    Ms. Koby may be contacted at skoby@joneswalker.com

    Sometimes a General Damages Assessment is Enough. . .

    July 06, 2026 —
    It has been a while since I last posted here at Construction Law Musings. Life, law practice, and “blogger’s block” have taken their toll on the posting schedule. Hopefully this will be one of several upcoming posts now that the litigation schedule has lightened a bit over the summer. Today’s post is about damages. Specifically damage to a homeowner’s roof and her legal damages therefor. That last is of course a sentence that only a construction attorney (or other litigator) could possibly craft and have it make sense. Now, on with the case. . .In Hardesty Construction, Inc. v. Weedon, the facts are as follows: Ms. Weedon had hail damage to the roof of her home. She hired Hardesty Construction to repair and replace the roof. After the first roof was installed and failed inspection, a second roof was installed. The issue was that the first roof had a warranty and the second roof, installed similarly to the first (and allegedly with the same construction issues according to Ms. Weedon’s expert), was not provided with the promised warranty. As one may expect, Weedon sued Hardesty and Hardesty Construction for fraudulent inducement and breach of contract. At trial, Weedon testified, without objection, that her home was worth $40,000 less because of Hardesty Construction’s work, which was based partially on quotes Weedon received to fix the roof. The Circuit Court granted Hardesty Construction’s motion to strike Weedon’s fraudulent inducement claim, but not her other claims. A jury awarded Weedon $30,253.30 on her breach of contract claim. Hardesty Construction appealed, arguing the Circuit Court erred in (a) allowing the jury to consider Weedon’s valuation testimony because it was not based on her personal knowledge and (b) denying its motion to strike based on insufficient evidence as to damages. Weedon assigned cross-error in the Circuit Court’s decision to grant the motion to strike her fraudulent inducement claim against Samual Hardesty. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com