BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort expert witness Columbia County Washington hospital construction expert witness Columbia County Washington office building expert witness Columbia County Washington custom home expert witness Columbia County Washington townhome construction expert witness Columbia County Washington concrete tilt-up expert witness Columbia County Washington multi family housing expert witness Columbia County Washington industrial building expert witness Columbia County Washington mid-rise construction expert witness Columbia County Washington tract home expert witness Columbia County Washington structural steel construction expert witness Columbia County Washington condominiums expert witness Columbia County Washington institutional building expert witness Columbia County Washington retail construction expert witness Columbia County Washington high-rise construction expert witness Columbia County Washington production housing expert witness Columbia County Washington parking structure expert witness Columbia County Washington low-income housing expert witness Columbia County Washington landscaping construction expert witness Columbia County Washington Medical building expert witness Columbia County Washington condominium expert witness Columbia County Washington housing expert witness Columbia County Washington
    Columbia County Washington structural engineering expert witnessesColumbia County Washington construction expert witness public projectsColumbia County Washington eifs expert witnessColumbia County Washington roofing construction expertColumbia County Washington fenestration expert witnessColumbia County Washington forensic architectColumbia County Washington delay claim expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Columbia County, Washington

    Washington Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: (SB 5536) The legislature passed a contractor protection bill that reduces contractors' exposure to lawsuits to six years from 12, and gives builders seven "affirmative defenses" to counter defect complaints from homeowners. Claimant must provide notice no later than 45 days before filing action; within 21 days of notice of claim, "construction professional" must serve response; claimant must accept or reject inspection proposal or settlement offer within 30 days; within 14 days following inspection, construction pro must serve written offer to remedy/compromise/settle; claimant can reject all offers; statutes of limitations are tolled until 60 days after period of time during which filing of action is barred under section 3 of the act. This law applies to single-family dwellings and condos.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Columbia County Washington

    A license is required for plumbing, and electrical trades. Businesses must register with the Secretary of State.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Lewis-Clark Home Builders Association
    Local # 1310
    1313 6TH ST
    CLARKSTON, WA 99403

    Columbia County Washington Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Tri-Cities
    Local # 4911
    10001 W Clearwater Ave
    Kennewick, WA 99336

    Columbia County Washington Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Lower Columbia Contr Assoc
    Local # 4922
    PO Box 2306
    Longview, WA 98632

    Columbia County Washington Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Central Washington Home Builders Association
    Local # 4909
    3301 W Nob Hill Blvd
    Yakima, WA 98902

    Columbia County Washington Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association of Clark County
    Local # 4908
    103 E 29th St
    Vancouver, WA 98663

    Columbia County Washington Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association of Washington-State
    Local # 4900
    111 W 21st Avenue
    Olympia, WA 98501

    Columbia County Washington Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Olympia Master Builders
    Local # 4933
    1211 State Ave NE
    Olympia, WA 98506

    Columbia County Washington Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Columbia County Washington


    Client Alert: Design Immunity Affirmative Defense Not Available to Public Entities Absent Evidence of Pre-Accident Discretionary Approval of the Plan or Design

    Arizona Supreme Court Clarifies Area Variance Standard; Property Owners May Obtain an Area Variance When Special Circumstances Existed at Purchase

    Eyes on the Sky: Regulating DJI Drones on Federal and Private Construction Sites

    Can a Non-Signatory Invoke an Arbitration Provision?

    Morrison Bridge Allegedly Crumbling

    What to do When the Worst Happens: Responding to a Cybersecurity Breach

    Nevada’s Home Building Industry can Breathe Easier: No Action on SB250 Leaves Current Attorney’s Fees Provision Intact

    Illinois Legislature Passes Bill Allowing Punitive Damages In Most Wrongful Death Actions

    Big Policyholder Win in Michigan

    Construction Contractor “Mean Tweets” Edition

    Embattled SNC-Lavalin Files Ethics Appeal, Realigns Structure

    Bar Against Forum Selection Clauses in Construction Contracts Extended to Design Professionals

    Drone Use On Construction Projects

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (05/23/23) – Distressed Prices, Carbon Removal and Climate Change

    Sellers' Alleged Misrepresentation Does Not Amount To An Occurrence

    How the Science of Infection Can Make Cities Stronger

    Housing Starts in U.S. Drop to Lowest Level in Three Months

    HB 20-1046 - Private Retainage Reform - Postponed Indefinitely

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in the 2022 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America®

    Sweat the Small Stuff – Don’t Overlook These Three (3) Clauses When Negotiating Your Construction Contract

    Sometimes you Need to Consider the Coblentz Agreement

    How To Deal With Contractors Overcharging You – Bad Contractor Series Part 4

    ASHRAE Seeks Comments by May 26 on Draft of Pathogen Mitigation Standard

    Revised Federal Rule Regarding Class-Wide Settlements

    Assert a Party’s Noncompliance of Conditions Precedent with Particularity

    Construction Defect Reform Bill Passes Colorado Senate

    Carroll Brock of Larchmont Homes Dies at Age 88

    Insurance Alert: Insurer Delay Extends Time to Repair or Replace Damaged Property

    Asserting Non-Disclosure Claim Involving Residential Real Property and Whether Facts Are “Readily Observable”

    Coverage for Injury to Insured’s Employee Not Covered

    Unjust Enrichment Damages Must Be Measurable and Quantifiable

    MDL Panel Grants Consolidation for One Group of COVID-19 Claims

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “That’s Not How I Read It”

    “Pay When Paid” Provisions May Not Be Dead, at Least Not Yet

    UPDATE: Texas Federal Court Permanently Enjoins U.S. Department of Labor “Persuader Rule” Requiring Law Firms and Other Consultants to Disclose Work Performed for Employers on Union Organization Efforts

    Claims for Bad Faith and Punitive Damages Survive Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment

    Eleventh Circuit Finds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Claims

    Brenda Radmacher Authors Chapter in ABA Publication on Construction Delays

    Court Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Construction Defect Suit

    Mortgage Whistleblower Stands Alone as U.S. Won’t Join Lawsuit

    Settlement Reached in Bridge Failure Lawsuit

    Colorado homebuilders target low-income buyers with bogus "affordable housing" bill

    It’s That Time of Year: Contract Review Time

    Lien Law Change in Idaho

    Forget Palm Springs—Santa Fe Is the New Mecca for Modern Architecture

    Default Should Never Be An Option

    California Superior Court Overrules Insurer's Demurrer on COVID-19 Claim

    Builders Arrested after Building Collapses in India

    Gilroy Homeowners Sue over Leaky Homes

    Business Interruption Claim Granted in Part, Denied in Part
    Corporate Profile

    COLUMBIA COUNTY WASHINGTON CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Columbia County, Washington 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
    Columbia County, Washington

    Angela Zanin Featured in LACBA List of Women’s History Month Honorees

    March 17, 2026 —
    Los Angeles Partner Angela Zanin was recently honored for her leadership and diversity initiatives in the California legal community by the Los Angeles County Bar Association (LACBA) as part of the organization’s Women’s History Month initiative. LACBA highlighted Ms. Zanin’s efforts in the community. After serving as President of the Italian American Lawyers Association (IALA) in 2023, she co-founded the Los Angeles County Unity Bar (LACUB), an alliance of bar associations dedicated to promoting diversity in the judiciary. Consisting of ten member organizations, the LACUB takes pride in its endorsement of over 40 candidates appointed to the California Court of Appeal, U.S. District Courts, Los Angeles Superior Court, and Orange County Superior Court. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    PSA: Be Sure to Document (Even When Time is Short)

    April 14, 2026 —
    Written change orders are a big deal. Almost all construction contracts (at least the well drafted ones) require written contracts. Written change orders are even important enough that Virginia law requires these provisions in residential construction contracts. Why are they so important? Because they are a “mini-contract” of sorts. They set the expectations, price, time, and work to be performed; work that was not included in the original price or scope for the project. Without this in writing, there will be no record of what the parties agreed to do. Does this sound familiar? Sound like its own contract? It should. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Connecticut Expands Construction Wage-Theft Liability and Prevailing Wage Recordkeeping Requirements

    June 29, 2026 —
    This post was co-authored by Labor + Employment group lawyer Christopher Costain, Hayden Eckblom (Summer Intern), and Pasqualina Fox-Mina (Summer Associate). Hayden and Pasqualina are not admitted to practice law. On May 11, 2026, Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont signed into law Public Act 26-12, a wide-ranging bill centered around employee rights. Our colleagues in Robinson+Cole’s Labor, Employment, Benefits + Immigration group recently published a legal update summarizing the key components of Public Act 26-12. Here, we focus on the Wage Theft and Prevailing Wage concepts in the bill that directly relate to the construction industry. Wage Theft With exceptions for public works and small residential projects, general contractors will be jointly and severally liable for any unpaid wages owed to an employee of a subcontractor of any tier on private construction projects, beginning with contracts entered into on or after January 1, 2027. As we know, there is a separate regime for public works projects involving payment bonds. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anand Gupta, Robinson & Cole LLP
    Mr. Gupta may be contacted at agupta@rc.com

    SDV Celebrates 30th Anniversary Press Release

    April 08, 2026 —
    Trumbull, Connecticut – Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. (SDV) is proud to announce the celebration of its 30th anniversary. Founded in 1996 by three attorneys in a small New Haven, Connecticut office, SDV was built on a clear and focused mission: representing policyholders in insurance coverage matters. Three decades later, that commitment remains at the core of the firm’s identity and has been instrumental in its continued success and reputation nationwide. Today, SDV is a nationally recognized boutique firm with 50 attorneys serving policyholders across the United States. Building on its longstanding reputation for excellence and client advocacy, the firm is pleased to announce the opening of its newest office in Massachusetts—an exciting milestone that reflects SDV’s continued growth. The new office is led by Managing Partner Anna Perry. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.

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

    April 20, 2026 —
    In Griffith Foods Int’l Inc. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA, 24-1217 & 24-1223 (7th Cir. Mar. 13, 2026), the Seventh Circuit addressed the meaning and scope of a pollution exclusion in a standard-form commercial general liability insurance policy for underlying injuries caused by ethylene oxide (EtO) emissions. The insurance dispute arose out of underlying tort litigation involving bodily injury claims, including cancer, allegedly caused by emissions of ethylene oxide over a 35-year period from 1984 through 2019 by Griffith Foods International and later Sterigenics U.S. The pollution exclusion at issue generally barred coverage for “bodily injury” arising out of the discharge, dispersal, release or escape of smoke, vapors, soot, fumes, acids, alkalis, toxic chemicals, or other irritants, contaminants or pollutants. Interpreting similar exclusions, the Illinois Supreme Court has previously held that the standard CGL pollution exclusion bars coverage for bodily injuries caused by traditional environmental pollution (essentially industrial emissions of pollutants), but not by more commonplace emissions (such as carbon monoxide from a residential furnace or excess chlorine in a backyard swimming pool). See American States Insurance Co. v. Koloms, 177 Ill. 2d 473 (Ill. 1997). In Griffith Foods, the District Court initially concluded that the pollution exclusion did not apply because the companies emitted EtO pursuant to a permit issued by the IEPA. The District Court reached this latter conclusion by applying Erie Insurance Exchange v. Imperial Marble Corp., 957 N.E.2d 1214 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011), an Illinois intermediate appellate court decision finding it ambiguous whether a CGL policy’s pollution exclusion barred coverage for emissions authorized by regulatory permit. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason Taylor, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Taylor may be contacted at jtaylor@tlsslaw.com

    Meet BWB&O’s Super Lawyers Rising Stars in Colorado!

    April 08, 2026 —
    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP is thrilled to share that Partner Devin Brunson and Associate Melissa Youngpeter have been named to the Super Lawyers 2026 Colorado Rising Stars list. This recognition reflects their exceptional work in Personal Injury and Civil Litigation.
    SUPER LAWYERS RISING STARS
    Devin Brunson: 2024-2026
    Melissa Youngpeter: 2026
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP

    Only A Contractor Can Appeal a Contracting Officer’s Final Decision

    April 20, 2026 —
    A recent decision from the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals confirms that “only a ‘contractor’ may file an appeal of a contracting officer’s final decision.” Wattiker v. General Services Administration, 2026 WL 846001 (CBCA 2026) (citation omitted). The term “contractor is not an ambiguous term. A ‘contractor’ refers to a party to a federal government contract. Wattiker (citing the Contract Disputes Act). This is why the Contract Disputes Act does not apply to parties that are NOT in contract with the federal government. Id. In Wattiker, an appellant (appealing party) challenged the dismissal of a co-appellant. The co-appellant was dismissed because he was not a contractor, i.e., a party in contract with the federal government. In other words, the co-appellant had no privity of contract with the federal government. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    New York Team Secures Dismissal of Premises Liability Action Against Client

    May 26, 2026 —
    New York Associate Nicole Koch and Partner Jennine Gerrard recently secured a complete dismissal of a plaintiff’s claims for injuries following a fall in front of a client’s business at an outdoor mall. The plaintiff alleged that she was walking on the sidewalk outside of the client's hair care supply store in the Bronx in May 2024 when she tripped and fell on a broken/defective portion of the sidewalk. As a result of the accident, the plaintiff suffered injuries to her spine, hip, wrist, and both knees. She proceeded to file suit in New York County Supreme Court against Lewis Brisbois’ client and the landlord for the property. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois