BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    multi family housing expert witness Sullivan County Tennessee custom homes expert witness Sullivan County Tennessee structural steel construction expert witness Sullivan County Tennessee institutional building expert witness Sullivan County Tennessee concrete tilt-up expert witness Sullivan County Tennessee retail construction expert witness Sullivan County Tennessee high-rise construction expert witness Sullivan County Tennessee townhome construction expert witness Sullivan County Tennessee landscaping construction expert witness Sullivan County Tennessee mid-rise construction expert witness Sullivan County Tennessee condominium expert witness Sullivan County Tennessee housing expert witness Sullivan County Tennessee tract home expert witness Sullivan County Tennessee condominiums expert witness Sullivan County Tennessee Subterranean parking expert witness Sullivan County Tennessee industrial building expert witness Sullivan County Tennessee low-income housing expert witness Sullivan County Tennessee casino resort expert witness Sullivan County Tennessee custom home expert witness Sullivan County Tennessee Medical building expert witness Sullivan County Tennessee office building expert witness Sullivan County Tennessee production housing expert witness Sullivan County Tennessee
    Sullivan County Tennessee construction expert testimonySullivan County Tennessee reconstruction expert witnessSullivan County Tennessee construction claims expert witnessSullivan County Tennessee expert witness windowsSullivan County Tennessee architect expert witnessSullivan County Tennessee construction project management expert witnessSullivan County Tennessee architecture expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Sullivan County, Tennessee

    Tennessee Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: (HB 2787/SB2931 & HB 2771/SB 2201; Title 66, Chptr 36) Homeowners must serve written notice of a defect 15 days after its discovery; Contractors, upon receipt of the notice, have 10 business days to inspect the residence and inform any subcontractors it believes are reasonably responsible on the defect. Within 10 business days after notice of the claim, the subcontractor must serve a written response to contractor. Within 30 days after receipt of notice of a defect, the contractor must provide written notice of intention (repair, replace, monetarily compensate or reject) to the homeowner.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Sullivan County Tennessee

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Clarksville-Montgomery Co Home Builders Association
    Local # 4406
    PO Box 1167
    Clarksville, TN 37041

    Sullivan County Tennessee Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Gr Kingsport
    Local # 4445
    1200 E Sevier Ave
    Kingsport, TN 37664

    Sullivan County Tennessee Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Johnson City Area Home Builders Association
    Local # 4494
    1001 N Roan St
    Johnson City, TN 37601

    Sullivan County Tennessee Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Greene County Chapter of National Associated Home Builders
    Local # 4464
    70 Afton Road
    Afton, TN 37616
    Sullivan County Tennessee Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Tennessee
    Local # 4400
    213 5th Ave N Ste 200
    Nashville, TN 37219

    Sullivan County Tennessee Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Upper Cumberland
    Local # 4491
    PO Box 243
    Cookeville, TN 38503

    Sullivan County Tennessee Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Dyer Co
    Local # 4425
    1075 Cooper Dr
    Dyersburg, TN 38024
    Sullivan County Tennessee Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Sullivan County Tennessee


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

    A Closer Look at an HOA Board Member’s Duty to Homeowners

    Maui Wildfire Cleanup Could Cost $1B and Take One Year

    Environmental Justice: A Legislative and Regulatory Update

    Lower Manhattan Condos Rival Midtown’s Luxury Skyscrapers

    Witt Named to 2017 Super Lawyers

    When is a Residential Subcontractor not Subject to the VCPA? Read to Find Out

    In Hong Kong, You Can Find a Home Where the Buffalo Roam

    Client Alert: Service Via Tag Jurisdiction Insufficient to Subject Corporation to General Personal Jurisdiction

    "Repair Work" Endorsements and Punch List Work

    One Sector Is Building Strength Amid Slow Growth

    Seattle Independent Contractor Ordinance – Pitfalls for Unwary Construction Professionals

    The ‘Sole Option’ Arbitration Provision in Construction Contracts

    How to Build a Coronavirus Hospital in Ten Days

    General Liability Alert: A Mixed Cause of Action with Protected and Non-Protected Activity Not Subject to Anti-SLAPP Motion

    WSHB Managing Partner Chad Dunigan Named Finalist for Jerrold S. Oliver "Ollie" Award of Excellence

    Georgia Gov. Kemp Signs Sweeping Tort Reform Legislation into Law

    Speculative Luxury Homebuilding on the Rise

    Additional Insured’s Claim for a Defense Is Dismissed

    Nevada Business Magazine Ranks Madeline Arcellana and Reema Hassanieh as 2025 Top Attorneys in Nevada!

    NYC Luxury-Condo Buyers Await New Towers as Sales Slow

    The Anatomy of a Construction Dispute- The Claim

    St. Petersburg Florida’s Tallest Condo Tower Allegedly Riddled with Construction Defects

    Florida Court Gives Parties Assigned a Subrogation Claim a Math Lesson

    Subcontractor Allowed to Sue Designer for Negligence: California Courts Chip Away at the Economic Loss Doctrine (Independent Duty Rule)

    No Coverage for Installation of Defective Steel Framing

    COVID-19 Response: Essential Business Operations: a High-Stakes Question Under Proliferating “Stay at Home” Orders

    Lease-Leaseback Fight Continues

    San Francisco Law Firm Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman Hired New Partner

    Oregon Court of Appeals Rules That Negligent Construction (Construction Defect) Claims Are Subject to a Two-Year Statute of Limitations

    Traub Lieberman Partner Stephen Straus Wins Spoliation Motion in Favor of Defendant

    Supreme Court Rules Tariffs Unconstitutional: Why the Construction Industry Shouldn’t Expect Calm Just Yet

    Waive It Goodbye: Despite Evidence to the Contrary, Delaware Upholds an AIA Waiver of Subrogation Clause

    Trump Replaces Architect to Lead $300 Million Ballroom Design

    The Prolonged Effects on Commercial Property From Extreme Weather

    What You Need to Know to Protect the Project Against Defect Claims

    Case-Shiller Redo Shows Less Severe U.S. Home-Price Slump

    Construction Down in Twin Cities Area

    Difficult Task for Court to Analyze Delay and Disorder on Construction Project

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (08/15/23) – Manufacturing Soars with CHIPS Act, New Threats to U.S. Infrastructure and AI Innovation for One Company

    ADP Says Payrolls at Companies in U.S. Increase 200,000

    Catching Killer Clauses in Contract Negotiations

    Lewis Brisbois Ranked Tier 1 Nationally for Insurance Law, Mass Tort/Class Actions Defense by U.S. News/Best Lawyers

    Affordable Housing should not be Filled with Defects

    Jean Nouvel’s NYC ‘Vision Machine’ Sued Over Construction Defects

    Could This Gel Help Tame the California Fires?

    Fifth Circuit: Primary Insurer Relieved of Duty to Defend Without Release of Liability of Insured

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

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

    Appraisal Can Go Forward Prior to Resolution of Coverage Dispute
    Corporate Profile

    SULLIVAN COUNTY TENNESSEE CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Sullivan County, Tennessee 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 Sullivan County's 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
    Sullivan County, Tennessee

    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...

    Soot Constitutes Property Damage

    March 17, 2026 —
    Applying Missouri law, the Eighth Circuit affirmed the jury verdict awarding damages for the presence of soot after a fire. Maxus Metropolitan, LLC v. Travelers Property Cas. Co. of Am., 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 29921 (8th Cir. Nov, 17, 2025). A fire destroyed Phase 6 of a multi-building apartment complex known as the Metropolitan. At the time of the fire, all six phases of the Metropolitan were at various stages of completion, including some of which were occupied by tenants. Phase 6 was still under construction. The fire caused severe damage to Phase 5. The interiors of Phases 1-4 were unaffected by the fire. Maxus Metropolitan, the owner of the complex, had a policy with Travelers which covered up to $35 million in “direct physical loss, . . or damage.” The policy also provided coverage for up to $5 million in lost business income. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Jurisdiction Over Foreign Manufacturers in Construction Litigation

    May 14, 2026 —
    A recent decision from the Washington Court of Appeals provides important guidance on personal jurisdiction over foreign product manufacturers in construction and infrastructure litigation. In King County v. Aquatherm GmbH, No. 85572-7-I (Wash.Ct. App.Div.I)(unpublished), the court addressed whether a German manufacturer could be sued in Washington for alleged defects in piping used in major public infrastructure projects. The ruling offers a detailed, fact-driven roadmap for how Washington courts evaluate jurisdiction over foreign manufacturers operating through layered distribution networks. It also reflects a broader trend toward focusing on real-world commercial conduct rather than formal corporate structure. Background of the Case King County sued after widespread failures in polypropylene piping installed at the King County Correctional Facility. The pipe, manufactured by Aquatherm GmbH in Germany, was marketed, distributed, and installed through a network of U.S.-based entities. Following a six-week trial, the jury returned a verdict exceeding $18 million on claims under the Washington Product Liability Act and Consumer Protection Act. Aquatherm challenged, among other things, the trial court's exercise of personal jurisdiction. Reprinted courtesy of Timothy J. Repass, Wood Smith Henning Berman and Miki J. Saito, Wood Smith Henning Berman Mr. Repass may be contacted at trepass@wshblaw.com Ms. Saito may be contacted at msaito@wshblaw.com Read the full story...

    GRSM Team Obtains Defense Verdict for Homeowners’ Association in Orange County Superior Court

    July 20, 2026 —
    A Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani multi-state team, including Partners Christine Barker, Sean Ferron, and Keith Cramer, obtained a defense verdict on behalf of a homeowners’ association (HOA) in an Orange County Superior Court bench trial spanning two months. The case began in 2022 when a homeowner sued after the Architectural Review Committee and HOA Board of Directors declined his teardown-and-rebuild plans due to view and aesthetic concerns. After a motion for summary judgment ruling in which the court found that the existing covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) did not protect views, the HOA held a special election to add explicit view protections to the CC&Rs. At the February 2025 trial call, the plaintiff sought leave to file a third amended complaint challenging the validity of that vote, drastically reframing the case from CC&R enforcement to one of election validity. A second plaintiff then filed a parallel action toward the end of the limitations period, and the two cases were consolidated. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani

    Introducing the Updated 2026 Pillsbury Guide to Data Centers

    June 08, 2026 —
    Since the initial publication of the Pillsbury Guide to Data Centers in 2025, the market has continued to evolve—most notably with respect to power availability, energy strategy, tax and incentives planning, and investment activity across the sector. While many of the legal, commercial and regulatory frameworks addressed in the original Guide remain durable and relevant, recent developments warranted targeted updates and additions. The 2026 edition expands and updates our energy-focused content to reflect the increasingly central role of power procurement, interconnection and long-term energy strategy in data center development. We have incorporated new materials addressing power purchase and interconnection agreements, solar and other renewable energy solutions, advanced reactor designs, and nuclear-powered data centers projects, including an updated project tracker. We have also added new analysis covering state and local tax considerations and incentive structures relevant to data center development and operations, as well as current M&A and private equity trends shaping investment in the sector. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gravel2Gavel Team

    GRSM Trial Team Holds Alameda County Asbestos Verdict to $900,000 Against $50 Million Demand

    July 27, 2026 —
    Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani Partners John Katerndahl and Vincent Gunter recently obtained an outstanding trial result for a manufacturer of asbestos-containing electrical cable, holding a jury verdict to $900,000 against a $50 million demand following an eight-week trial in Alameda County Superior Court, which is among the most challenging asbestos venues in the country. The GRSM team also included Associate Brandon Sanchez, on-site trial Paralegal Laura Vitanova, and Paralegal Kerrie Lease. The plaintiffs, the surviving spouse and four children of a former painter who died of mesothelioma, alleged that the decedent was exposed to asbestos from the company’s electrical cable during construction of a California nuclear power facility. GRSM’s client was the sole remaining defendant at trial. The plaintiffs asked the jury for $50 million and called 15 witnesses across their case-in-chief and rebuttal. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani

    Preventing Common and Costly Water Intrusion Events in Construction

    July 13, 2026 —
    Water leaking into a building is a leading cause of damage and loss in the construction industry. On one jobsite, heavy rains flooded a sub-basement, damaging a new electrical transformer—all because a roof drain was not property connected. On another jobsite, a drinking-fountain supply line broke in a multistory building that was undergoing renovation, causing water to run—undetected—for an entire weekend, resulting in water damage to all lower floors, where construction had been finished. Those loss scenarios could have been prevented with a comprehensive and effective water damage prevention plan (WDPP). This includes routine site inspections to identify uncontrolled water damage exposures and basic maintenance to make sure drains are clean of debris and divert them to a catch basin or low point away from the building. An effective WDPP plan also incorporates technology such as backflow preventers on sewer connections and water sensing technology to monitor the most vulnerable exposures. Reprinted courtesy of Andrew Swift, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s Orange County Team for Securing a Strong MSJ Result in a Residential Gas Explosion Matter!

    May 14, 2026 —
    Huge Congratulations to Partner Kevin Wheeler and Associate Lindsey Wells for securing a strong result on a Motion for Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication filed on behalf of their client, the City of Murrieta. This was a complex, multi-party matter arising from a residential gas leak and explosion, where Plaintiffs alleged the City and MFPD failed to properly respond to the incident. After multiple complaints were consolidated and extensive defense work narrowed the case, eighteen plaintiffs remained asserting five causes of action against the City, prompting a comprehensive MSJ/MSA targeting liability, causation, and damages. The Court’s ruling reflects a significant win, particularly on the immunity framework. The Court eliminated the core negligence and assumed-duty claims arising from fire protection and emergency response activities. It further disposed of the misrepresentation and public nuisance claims. At the end of the day, three plaintiffs were dismissed entirely for failure to comply with Government Claims Act requirements, further reducing the scope of the case. While the dangerous condition claim remains, it does so in a very limited posture. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP