BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction expert witness Thompson Pennsylvania office building expert witness Thompson Pennsylvania institutional building expert witness Thompson Pennsylvania casino resort expert witness Thompson Pennsylvania parking structure expert witness Thompson Pennsylvania condominium expert witness Thompson Pennsylvania custom home expert witness Thompson Pennsylvania low-income housing expert witness Thompson Pennsylvania custom homes expert witness Thompson Pennsylvania housing expert witness Thompson Pennsylvania retail construction expert witness Thompson Pennsylvania Medical building expert witness Thompson Pennsylvania production housing expert witness Thompson Pennsylvania multi family housing expert witness Thompson Pennsylvania mid-rise construction expert witness Thompson Pennsylvania tract home expert witness Thompson Pennsylvania industrial building expert witness Thompson Pennsylvania landscaping construction expert witness Thompson Pennsylvania townhome construction expert witness Thompson Pennsylvania condominiums expert witness Thompson Pennsylvania hospital construction expert witness Thompson Pennsylvania Subterranean parking expert witness Thompson Pennsylvania
    Thompson Pennsylvania civil engineer expert witnessThompson Pennsylvania delay claim expert witnessThompson Pennsylvania construction defect expert witnessThompson Pennsylvania expert witness commercial buildingsThompson Pennsylvania construction code expert witnessThompson Pennsylvania window expert witnessThompson Pennsylvania construction cost estimating expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Thompson, 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 Thompson Pennsylvania

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


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Mifflin-Juniata Chapter
    Local # 3926
    5 Oak Drive
    Thompsontown, PA 17094

    Thompson Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Schuylkill Builders Assn
    Local # 3954
    1036 Schylkill Mountain Rd
    Schuylkill Haven, PA 17972

    Thompson Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Lehigh Valley Builders Association
    Local # 3904
    1524 W Linden St
    Allentown, PA 18102

    Thompson Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Huntingdon Co Builders Association
    Local # 3917
    PO Box 399
    Huntingdon, PA 16652

    Thompson Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Indiana-Armstrong Builders Association
    Local # 3914
    1380 Route 286 Highway East Suite 502
    Indiana, PA 15701

    Thompson Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Builders Association of Metro Pittsburgh
    Local # 3944
    2041 Blvd Of The Allies
    Pittsburgh, PA 15219

    Thompson Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Blair-Bedford Builders Association
    Local # 3908
    1410 Allegheny Street
    Hollidaysburg, PA 16648

    Thompson Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Thompson Pennsylvania


    High Court Could Alter Point-Source Discharge Definition in Taking Clean-Water Case

    Whose Employee is it Anyway?: Federal Court Finds No Coverage for Injured Subcontractor's Claim Based on Modified Employer's Liability Exclusion

    Contractors Prepare for a Strong 2021 Despite Unpredictability

    Ben L. Aderholt Joins Coats Rose Construction Litigation Group

    Understanding Entitlement to Delays and Proper Support

    Crossrail Audit Blames Busted Budget and Schedule on Mismanagement

    The G2G Year in Review: 2020

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Lisa Rolle and Christopher Acosta Win Motion to Dismiss in Bronx County Trip and Fall

    Small to Midsize Builders Making Profit on Overlooked Lots

    Long-Planned Miami Mega Mixed-Use Development Nears Initial Debut

    Texas Court Requires Insurer to Defend GC Despite Breach of Contract Exclusion

    White and Williams LLP Secures a Clean Sweep Dismissal of Architect's Professional Liability Coverage Lawsuit

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Faulty Workmanship Claim

    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

    Manhattan Trophy Home Sellers Test Buyer Limits on Price

    Illinois Court of Appeals Addresses What It Means to “Reside” in Property for Purposes of Coverage

    Chambers USA 2023 Recognizes Six Partners and Three Practices at Lewis Brisbois

    Proximity Trace Used to Monitor, Maintain Social Distancing on $1.9-Billion KCI Airport Project

    From Fantasy to Fact: Cristina Andersson on Our Robotic Future

    Mississippi Supreme Court Addresses Earth Movement Exclusion

    Not a Waiver for All: Maryland Declines to Apply Subrogation Waiver to Subcontractors

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (7/10/24) – Strong Construction Investment in Data Centers, Increase Use of Proptech in Hospitality and Effects of Remote-Work on Housing Market

    Indiana Court of Appeals Rules Against Contractor and Performance Bond Surety on Contractor's Differing Site Conditions Claim

    No Retrofit without Repurposing in Los Angeles

    Freight Train Carrying Hot Asphalt, Molten Sulfur Plunges Into Yellowstone River as Bridge Fails

    OSHA COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing ETS Unveiled

    California Construction Bill Dies in Committee

    Tesla’s Solar Roof Pricing Is Cheap Enough to Catch Fire

    Kahana Feld Welcomes Six Attorneys to the Firm in Q4 of 2023

    The Show Must Go On: Shuttered Venues Operators Grant Provides Lifeline for Live Music and Theater Venues

    Lake Charles Tower’s Window Damage Perplexes Engineers

    Rescission of Policy for Misrepresentation in Application Reversed

    Mississippi Floods Prompt New Look at Controversial Dam Project

    Homeowner Has No Grounds to Avoid Mechanics Lien

    Truck Hits Warning Beam That Falls, Kills Motorist at Las Vegas Bridge Project

    Seventh Circuit, With an Assist From the Illinois Supreme Court, Finds That “Pollution Exclusion” Bars Coverage For Emissions Allowed Under Regulatory Permit

    Denis Serkin and Michael S. Zicherman Co-Edit/Author Lexology Panoramic: Construction 2027

    Echoes of Shutdown in Delay of Key Building Metric

    Hurricane Ian: Florida Expedites Road Work as Damage Comes Into Focus

    Contractor Turns Former Sears Into Interim High School Following Palisades Wildfires

    Texas Shortens Cut-Off Date for Suits Against Homebuilders Who Provide a 6-Year Written Warranty

    Inaccurate Representations Can Lead to Differing Site Conditions Claim

    Rightfully Recovering Under a Coblentz Agreement

    McGraw Hill to Sell off Construction-Data Unit

    The Oregon Tort Claims Act (“OTCA”) Applies When a Duty Arises from Statute or Common Law and is Independent from The Terms of a Specific Contract. (OR)

    U.K. Construction Resumes Growth Amid Resurgent Housing Activity

    The Economic Loss Rule: From Where Does the Duty Arise?

    Does the Miller Act Trump Subcontract Dispute Provisions?

    Call Me Maybe: California’s Fair Claims Settlement Practices Regulations

    Harmon Tower Case Settled Prior to Start of Trial
    Corporate Profile

    THOMPSON PENNSYLVANIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Thompson, Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Thompson's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Thompson, Pennsylvania

    Your AEC Firm Has a Memory Problem. Here Is How to Fix It

    June 01, 2026 —
    AEC companies trying to operationalize AI often find they lack the data foundation on which to build. There may be an abundance of data hidden in documents, but you can’t reliably use it for AI. The lack of data quality was a key topic discussed at the AI in AEC 2026 conference. During the event, I met many experts working to solve this problem, including Pavlina Nikolova, Egnyte‘s EMEA AEC Practice Lead. The chat and her presentation highlighted the challenges and ways to overcome them. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    White and Williams LLP Secures Trio of Cyber Coverage Wins

    May 12, 2026 —
    Three weeks, three jurisdictions, three cyber wins. White and Williams picked up the first victory on March 9, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, where the court granted summary judgment to their client enforcing a Cyber Crime Loss sublimit. See Perry & Perry Builders, Inc. v. Cowbell Cyber and Obsidian Specialty Ins. Co., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49409 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 9, 2026). In Perry, the insured was deceived into transferring money intended for a vendor to an unintended third party. The insurer acknowledged that the loss was covered and paid the insured the policy’s Cyber Crime Loss sublimit. Discontent with a single sublimit, the insured argued that because it wired the money to the fraudster in separate transfers, it was entitled to a second Cyber Crime Loss sublimit. Reprinted courtesy of Gabriel Darwick, White and Williams LLP and Sean Elman, White and Williams LLP Mr. Darwick may be contacted at darwickg@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Elman may be contacted at elmans@whiteandwilliams.com Read the full story...

    Las Vegas Partner Jeffrey Saab and Team Leader D. Ryan Efros Secure a $0.00 Settlement on a Multimillion-Dollar Construction Defect Case!

    April 14, 2026 —
    Partner Jeffrey Saab and Team Leader D. Ryan Efros’ client was a construction supervisor on a palatial mansion. The homeowners claimed millions of dollars in damages and asserted the client was a general contractor (GC) and so responsible for the alleged defects. Jeff and Ryan took more than 15 depositions, reinforcing their trial strategy theme: that the client was not a GC, but Plaintiffs were. They secured significant concessions from Plaintiffs, pressed Plaintiffs’ own negligent construction choices, and made the risk of trying the case intolerable. On the eve of trial, Plaintiffs backed down, settling out Jeff and Ryan’s client for $0.00. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    A Permitting Base Checklist for Data Centers and Power Plants

    June 02, 2026 —
    There is a lot of talk these days about “license to operate” for data centers, meaning management of the relationships with stakeholders and broader communities concerning both the benefits and adverse consequences of locating a facility in a particular locale. Here, we are speaking of “license to operate” more literally—namely, the legal and regulatory permitting and approval requirements for a privately owned data center whether by itself or colocated with a power generating plant. Our Base Checklist includes generally and potentially applicable permitting requirements for development and operation, using California as an example. (Taking legal authority Frank Sinatra out of context, “If you can make it there, you can make it anywhere.”) The actual requirements for a given facility would depend, in part, on local law, including planning and zoning laws and plans, and the environment of the site. Just as examples, additional permitting and mitigation requirements might apply if sensitive receptors are located nearby (e.g., noise mitigation for residential dwellings), if sensitive and protected biological resources (e.g., jurisdictional waters and/or protected species) would be impacted, or if the present or former land uses require additional measures (e.g., hazardous materials remediation, mitigation for conversion of prime farmland, or protection of cultural resources). The scope of permit requirements would ultimately be determined by the applicable regulatory agencies and by the lead and responsible agencies under the applicable state environmental land use regime—in our reference case here, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. McDonough, Pillsbury, Stephen J. Humes, Pillsbury and Stacey C. Wright, Pillsbury Mr. McDonough may be contacted at michael.mcdonough@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Humes may be contacted at stephen.humes@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Wright may be contacted at stephen.humes@pillsburylaw.com Read the full story...

    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

    Substantial Evidence of Flood Loss is Not a Substitute for Required Proof of Loss

    April 20, 2026 —
    The court found that the insurer properly denied the insured’s claim for loss due to flood because a proof of loss was never submitted. Bay Haven at Coco Bay Condominium Association, Inc. v. Hartford Ins. Co. of the Midwest, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6847 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 14, 2026). Bay Haven managed several condo buildings. When Hurricane Ian hit, it caused significant flood damage to these properties. Bay Haven held federal flood insurance policies through Hartford under “Write-Your-Own” policies. This meant Hartford was essentially a fiscal agent that managed policies and handled claims but paid them using federal funds. Following the storm, FEMA extended the usual 60-day deadline for filing a proof of loss to one year, or until September 28, 2023. Bay Haven did not submit its proofs of loss until November 2023. FEMA granted an extension but only for the specific amounts in the November requests. Hartford did not waive the 60-day proof of loss requirement for any other proof of loss. Hartford paid the amounts reflected in the November submissions. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Pay-If-Paid: What You Need to Know Before Signing on the Dotted Line

    August 03, 2026 —
    Buried deep in the fine print of a subcontract, a pay-if-paid clause may be looming. If you are a subcontractor or supplier, misreading these clauses can put your cash flow at risk. If you are an owner or general contractor, drafting them incorrectly can leave you with obligations you never intended — or unenforceable protections you were counting on. It is more important than ever to understand when pay-if-paid clauses hold up and when they do not, as well as recent litigation and drafting trends. Whether you are negotiating a new agreement, reviewing your standard form contracts, or staring down a payment dispute, understanding how Arizona law treats pay-if-paid clauses is essential. In this article, we break down key considerations, walk through the legal standards Arizona courts apply, and offer practical tips to consider to help you protect your payment rights on the next project. Reprinted courtesy of Christian Fernandez, Snell & Wilmer and Matthew Racioppo, Snell & Wilmer Mr. Fernandez may be contacted at cfernandez@swlaw.com Mr. Racioppo may be contacted at mracioppo@swlaw.com Read the full story...

    Nationwide Preliminary Injunction Ordering Department of Defense to Resume Review of Wind Energy Projects

    September 21, 2026 —
    On August 6, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon granted a preliminary injunction in Renewable Northwest v. Hegseth, Case No. 3:26-cv-01092-IM, ordering the Department of Defense (DoD) to resume processing wind energy project applications under the existing statutory and regulatory framework and staying DoD’s review freeze pending final adjudication on the merits. Background In 2011, Congress created the Military Aviation and Installation Assurance Siting Clearinghouse (Clearinghouse) within DoD to review wind energy projects that might affect military operations. When a wind project developer files an application with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the FAA refers it to DoD to determine whether the project poses an “unacceptable risk to the national security.” Reprinted courtesy of Victor J. Roehm III, Snell & Wilmer, Christopher P. Colyer, Snell & Wilmer and Sara M. Ajeti, Snell & Wilmer Mr. Roehm may be contacted at vroehm@swlaw.com Mr. Colyer may be contacted at ccolyer@swlaw.com Ms. Ajeti may be contacted at sajeti@swlaw.com Read the full story...