BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing expert witness Monroe County Pennsylvania office building expert witness Monroe County Pennsylvania industrial building expert witness Monroe County Pennsylvania high-rise construction expert witness Monroe County Pennsylvania retail construction expert witness Monroe County Pennsylvania condominium expert witness Monroe County Pennsylvania institutional building expert witness Monroe County Pennsylvania mid-rise construction expert witness Monroe County Pennsylvania concrete tilt-up expert witness Monroe County Pennsylvania condominiums expert witness Monroe County Pennsylvania hospital construction expert witness Monroe County Pennsylvania Medical building expert witness Monroe County Pennsylvania tract home expert witness Monroe County Pennsylvania housing expert witness Monroe County Pennsylvania low-income housing expert witness Monroe County Pennsylvania Subterranean parking expert witness Monroe County Pennsylvania custom homes expert witness Monroe County Pennsylvania parking structure expert witness Monroe County Pennsylvania casino resort expert witness Monroe County Pennsylvania townhome construction expert witness Monroe County Pennsylvania structural steel construction expert witness Monroe County Pennsylvania landscaping construction expert witness Monroe County Pennsylvania
    Monroe County Pennsylvania stucco expert witnessMonroe County Pennsylvania construction defect expert witnessMonroe County Pennsylvania construction forensic expert witnessMonroe County Pennsylvania expert witnesses fenestrationMonroe County Pennsylvania construction expertsMonroe County Pennsylvania construction claims expert witnessMonroe County Pennsylvania construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Monroe County, Pennsylvania

    Pennsylvania Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: HB 1875 stipulates that “no later than 90 days before filing an action, serve written notice of claim on the contractor. Upon receipt of notice, builder has 15 days to forward the claim to any subcontractor/supplier and 30 days after service of notice to offer to compromise and settle the claim by monetary payment without inspection, propose to inspect the dwelling that is the subject of the claim; or reject the claim. Contractor has 14 days after inspection to provide written notice of intention.”


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Monroe County Pennsylvania

    No state license required. For public works projects, see General Services website.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Pocono Builders Association (PA)
    Local # 3939
    745 Main St Ste 203
    Stroudsburg, PA 18360

    Monroe County Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Central Susquehanna Builders Association
    Local # 3956
    300 Walnut St
    Mifflinburg, PA 17844

    Monroe County Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Lawrence County Builders Association
    Local # 3937
    1435 Devils Elbow Rd
    New Castle, PA 16101

    Monroe County Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Builders Association of Central PA
    Local # 3952
    2038 Sandy Drive Ste 100
    State College, PA 16803

    Monroe County Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Carbon Bldrs Association
    Local # 3922
    PO Box 218 490 Ore Street
    Bowmanstown, PA 18030

    Monroe County Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Clearfield County Chapter
    Local # 3903
    PO Box 512
    Clearfield, PA 16830

    Monroe County Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Builders Association of Gr Dubois Area
    Local # 3959
    PO Box 664
    Du Bois, PA 15801
    Monroe County Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Monroe County Pennsylvania


    How to Prepare for Potential Construction Disputes Resulting From COVID-19

    Be Sure to Dot All of the “I’s” and Cross the “T’s” in Virginia

    Be Mindful Accepting Payment When Amounts Owed Are In Dispute

    IEEPA Tariff Refunds: CBP Launches CAPE Process

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “A Fastball Right to the Bean!”

    Mortgage Interest Rates Increase on Newly Built Homes

    The Living Makes Buildings Better with Computational Design

    Construction Executives Should Be Dusting Off Employee Handbooks

    Delays and Suspension of the Work Under Fixed Price Government Contract

    Time is Money. Unless You’re an Insurance Company

    Construction Warranties and the Statute of Repose – Southern States Chemical, Inc v. Tampa Tank & Welding Inc.

    2017 California Employment Law Update

    Housing Woes Worse in L.A. Than New York, San Francisco

    BWB&O Partner Jack Briscoe and Associate Anoushe Marandjian Win Summary Judgment Motion on Behalf of Homeowner Client!

    Depreciating Labor Costs May be Factor in Actual Cash Value

    Manhattan Site for Supertall Condo Finds New Owner at Auction

    Insurer Must Cover Construction Defects Claims under Actual Injury Rule

    Megaproject Savings Opportunities

    Builders Seek to Modify Scaffold Law

    Managing Once-in-a-Generation Construction Problems – Part II

    Subcontractor Exception to "Your Work" Exclusion Does Not Apply to Coverage Under Subcontractor's Policy

    Property Owner Found Liable for Injuries to Worker of Unlicensed Contractor, Again

    Georgia Federal Court Says Fact Questions Exist As To Whether Nitrogen Is An “Irritant” or “Contaminant” As Used in Pollution Exclusion

    Workers Compensation Immunity and the Intentional Tort Exception

    Sensors for Smarter Construction – Interview with Laura Kassovic of MbientLab

    Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal Secured by Lewis Brisbois in Coverage Dispute Involving San Francisco 49ers’ Levi Stadium

    Manhattan Condo Resale Prices Reach Record High

    Ignoring Employee ADA Accommodation Requests Can Be Costly – A Cautionary Tale

    Boilerplate Contract Language on Permits could cause Problems for Contractors

    White and Williams LLP Recognized on the List of Largest Law Firms in Greater Philadelphia

    Notes from the Nordic Smart Building Convention

    Don’t Assert as a Counterclaim to a Lien Foreclosure Lawsuit an Order to Show Cause Claim

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

    The 411 on the New 415 Location of the Golden State Warriors

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (9/4/24) – DOJ Sues RealPage, Housing Sales Increase and U.S. Can’t Build Homes Fast Enough

    New York Enacts First-in-the-Nation Statewide Data Center Moratorium

    Building with Recycled Plastics – Interview with Jeff Mintz of Envirolastech

    "Occurrence" May Include Intentional Acts In Montana

    Traub Lieberman Partner Bradley T. Guldalian Wins Summary Judgment in Pinellas County Circuit Court

    N.J. Appellate Court Confirms that AIA Construction Contract Bars Insurer's Subrogation Claim

    KB Homes Sues Condo Buyers over Alleged Cybersquatting and Hacking

    Insured’s Bad Faith Claim Survives Summary Judgment

    Subcontractors Eye 2022 with Guarded Optimism

    Unlicensed Contracting and Florida Statute S. 489.128

    Compass, Zillow Take Feud Over Home Listings Into NYC Court

    Remote Depositions in the Post-Covid-19 World

    Wreckage Removal Underway at Site of Collapsed Key Bridge in Baltimore, But Weather Slows Progress

    How Construction Contracts are Made. Hint: It’s a Bit Like Making Sausage

    Best Practices After Receiving Notice of a Construction Claim

    Wall Failure Due to Construction Defect Says Insurer
    Corporate Profile

    MONROE COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Monroe County, Pennsylvania 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
    Monroe County, Pennsylvania

    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

    Southwest Super Lawyers Recognizes 50 Snell & Wilmer Attorneys in 2026 Rankings

    June 15, 2026 —
    PHOENIX (April 22, 2026) – Snell & Wilmer is pleased to announce that 50 attorneys in the Phoenix and Tucson offices have been selected for inclusion in the 2026 Southwest Super Lawyers publication. Of those 50, four were recognized for the first time and 24 were recognized as Southwest Rising Stars. Super Lawyers is a listing of lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. The selection process is multi-phased and includes independent research, peer nominations, and peer evaluations. Super Lawyers was first published in 1991 by Law & Politics and was acquired by Thomson Reuters, Legal in February 2010. Thomson Reuters is a leading source of information for businesses and professionals. The below Snell & Wilmer attorneys have been selected for inclusion in the 2026 Southwest Super Lawyers rankings. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Snell & Wilmer

    Consider The Limited Warranty from Your Homebuilder

    July 06, 2026 —
    When purchasing a home from a homebuilder, there is an important consideration when it comes to the limited warranty you receive around the time you close on the home. That limited warranty likely includes an arbitration provision requiring you to arbitrate your disputes, such as construction defect claims, against the homebuilder. That arbitration provision will most likely include all claims, including statutory claims (such as a statutory violation of a building code claim), requiring you to arbitrate, as opposed to litigate, your disputes against the homebuilder. This is an important consideration. If the arbitration provision does not allow you to arbitrate all of your claims, and eliminates your rights to legitimate statutory claims, the arbitration provision could be unenforceable. By way of example, in a residential construction defect dispute, Anderson v. Taylor Morrison of Florida, Inc., 223 So.3d 1088 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017), the appeal turned on whether the arbitration provision in the homebuilder’s limited warranty was valid. The homeowners took possession of their home in 2009. In 2015, the homeowners served a Florida Statutes Chapter 558 notice of construction defects that included a statutory violation of a building code claim under Florida Statute §553.84. The limited warranty included an arbitration provision that specified it was the “exclusive remedy” for all disputes arising out of or related to the warranty or issues with the home and property. When read together with the warranty’s disclaimer that precluded claims not covered by the warranty “whether in contract, tort, or otherwise,” the statutory building code violation claim could not be remedied through arbitration because it fell outside the warranty’s coverage. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    What Massachusetts Contractors and Developers Can Learn from Cannistraro v. Columbia Construction

    July 13, 2026 —
    Introduction On June 26, 2026 the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court issued its decision in J.C. Cannistraro, LLC v. Columbia Construction Co.—a holding that sits at the intersection of Prompt Pay Act compliance and the Massachusetts Arbitration Act.[1] Most already know that the Massachusetts Prompt Pay Act (PPA) imposes strict timing and certification requirements for rejecting payment applications and proposed change orders on projects valued at $3 million or more. Most notably, the PPA requires the paying party to give the payee written notice of its approval or rejection of progress applications and proposed changes within 15 days of receipt, which notice must include a “factual and contractual basis for the rejection” and must be “certified as made in good faith.”[2] In the absence of a timely certified notice, payment is “deemed to be approved” unless the payor properly rejects payment before it comes due.[3] Reprinted courtesy of Anthony LaPlaca, Seyfarth Shaw LLP and Luke Marston, Seyfarth Shaw LLP Mr. LaPlaca may be contacted at alaplaca@seyfarth.com Mr. Marston may be contacted at lmarston@seyfarth.com Read the full story...

    Fraud Allegations Stymie Additional Insured’s Request for a Defense

    May 14, 2026 —
    The Federal District Court granted the insurer’s motion to dismiss the insured’s complaint seeking a defense of the underlying case alleging fraud. Renovation Realty, Inc. v. Colony Ins. Co., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21409 (S.D. Cal. Jan. 30, 2026). Mara Fortin sued Renovation Realty and others (“Fortin litigation”) from the fraudulent sale of a residence. The underlying complaint alleged Renovation “deliberately misrepresented of the residence as ‘completely remodeled’ and ‘meticulously maintained’.” The defendants, however, including Renovation, “knew from sources including a pre-renovation termite report documenting fungus and dry rot . . . that the Property harbored pre-existing material defects.” Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Every High-Tech Building Has Many Lifespans

    August 16, 2026 —
    When I worked as an architect, our team designed a laboratory for fuel research. The facility included a large research hall where various boilers and other devices were tested and analyzed. The setup required extensive floor channeling under the thick concrete floor. We suggested building a modular system that would allow flexibility in the future, when requirements would certainly change. They did not want that because of budget constraints. The high-tech construction trend is spreading. Data centers, semiconductor fabs, battery plants, and life science facilities share one property that sets them apart from ordinary buildings. The technology inside turns over faster than the structure around it. Server generations change every three to five years. Rack densities have risen from 10 or 20 kW to 130 kW and beyond in just a few years. A high-tech facility is really several buildings with different lifespans inside one envelope, and we keep designing them as if they were one. The failure is not that things become obsolete. It is that we never say when each layer is expected to. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    GRSM Attorneys Recognized in The Best Lawyers in America® 2027

    August 24, 2026 —
    Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani is pleased to announce that 183 of its attorneys were listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2027 Edition, six of whom received “Lawyer of the Year” recognitions. Additionally, 49 GRSM attorneys were recognized in Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch 2027. Best Lawyers lists are compiled based on peer-review evaluations. For the 2027 edition of The Best Lawyers in America®, results were determined using millions of confidential attorney evaluations. Ones to Watch adopts the same peer-review methodology. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani

    Bridging the Gap at Alaska’s Juneau Creek

    September 21, 2026 —
    The largest single-span steel plate girder bridge launch in the nation wasn’t about setting records. Alaska’s Juneau Creek Bridge design was a matter of necessity. The fully erected steel plate girder bridge, featuring a 440-ft main span hovering 285 ft above the Juneau Creek, was part of the larger Sterling Highway project. It offered a logistical challenge but was chosen among over a dozen bridge types due to the unique constraints brought by the mountainous site. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tim Newcomb, Engineering News-Record
    ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com