BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums expert witness Danbury Wisconsin mid-rise construction expert witness Danbury Wisconsin townhome construction expert witness Danbury Wisconsin multi family housing expert witness Danbury Wisconsin office building expert witness Danbury Wisconsin parking structure expert witness Danbury Wisconsin custom homes expert witness Danbury Wisconsin hospital construction expert witness Danbury Wisconsin casino resort expert witness Danbury Wisconsin industrial building expert witness Danbury Wisconsin Medical building expert witness Danbury Wisconsin institutional building expert witness Danbury Wisconsin Subterranean parking expert witness Danbury Wisconsin custom home expert witness Danbury Wisconsin condominium expert witness Danbury Wisconsin housing expert witness Danbury Wisconsin structural steel construction expert witness Danbury Wisconsin retail construction expert witness Danbury Wisconsin low-income housing expert witness Danbury Wisconsin production housing expert witness Danbury Wisconsin tract home expert witness Danbury Wisconsin landscaping construction expert witness Danbury Wisconsin
    Danbury Wisconsin soil failure expert witnessDanbury Wisconsin construction defect expert witnessDanbury Wisconsin stucco expert witnessDanbury Wisconsin expert witness structural engineerDanbury Wisconsin construction expert witness consultantDanbury Wisconsin building envelope expert witnessDanbury Wisconsin forensic architect
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Danbury, Wisconsin

    Wisconsin Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: SB448 specifies 90 day notice with details and evidence prior to commencing legal action. It provides for a 15 day written response from contractor or 25 days if cross-claims against subcontractors; The law states “The claimant and contractor or supplier are bound by any contractor or supplier warranty terms pertaining to products or services supplied for the dwelling.”


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Danbury Wisconsin

    Contractors are required to have the correct credentials for their trade. Not all classifications require credentialing. For a list of credentials, see the website.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Northland Area Builders Association
    Local # 5135
    29148 Mail Rd
    Danbury, WI 54830

    Danbury Wisconsin Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Headwaters Builders Association
    Local # 5196
    PO Box 1074
    Minocqua, WI 54548

    Danbury Wisconsin Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Heart of the North Builders Association
    Local # 5137
    PO Box 6
    Rice Lake, WI 54868

    Danbury Wisconsin Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Wausau Area Builders Association
    Local # 5172
    141 W Thomas St
    Wausau, WI 54401

    Danbury Wisconsin Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    St Croix Valley Home Builders Association
    Local # 5182
    1632 ROLLING HILLS LN
    River Falls, WI 54022

    Danbury Wisconsin Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Door County Home Builders Association
    Local # 5103
    PO Box 112 4087
    Sturgeon Bay, WI 54235

    Danbury Wisconsin Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Chippewa Valley Home Builders Association
    Local # 5104
    4319 Jeffers Rd Ste 200
    Eau Claire, WI 54703

    Danbury Wisconsin Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Danbury Wisconsin


    Failing to Release A Mechanics Lien Can Destroy Your Construction Business

    Water Backup Payment Satisfies Insurer's Obligation to Cover for Rain Damage

    Home Buyer Disclosures, What’s Required and What Isn’t

    New York Public Library’s “Most Comprehensive Renovation” In Its History

    Insurance Attorney Gary Barrera Joins Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group

    Beware of Personal-Liability Clauses – Even When Signing in Your Representative Capacity

    Termination of Construction Contracts

    Ninth Circuit Resolves Federal-State Court Split Regarding Whether 'Latent' Defects Discovered After Duration of Warranty Period are Actionable under California's Lemon Law Statute

    Builder’s Be Wary of Insurance Policies that Provide No Coverage for Building: Mt. Hawley Ins. Co v. Creek Side at Parker HOA

    Will On-Site Robotics Become Feasible in Construction?

    Lumber Drops to Nine-Month Low, Extending Retreat From Record

    Texas Supreme Court Defines ‘Plaintiff’ in 3rd-Party Claims Against Design Professionals

    Washington Court of Appeals Upholds Standard of Repose in Fruit Warehouse Case

    WSHB Expands into the Southeast

    Google, Environmentalists and University Push Methane-Leak Detection

    Tenth Circuit Finds Appraisal Can Decide Causation of Loss Under Colorado Law

    Loss Caused by Theft, Continuous Water Discharge Not Covered

    The Administrative Procedure Act and the Evolution of Environmental Law

    Florida Court of Appeals Holds Underlying Tort Case Must Resolve Before Third-Party Spoliation Action Can Be Litigated

    Toolbox Talk Series Recap – Considerations for Optimizing Dispute Resolution Clauses

    RONI: What You Lose by Not Investing in AI – With Sam Zolfagharian

    Research Institute: A Shared Information Platform Reduces Construction Costs Considerably

    Court Rules That ERISA Preemption Bars Recovery of Union Benefit Fund Payments Pursuant to New York’s Wage Theft Statute from a General Contractor Where a Subcontractor Failed to Fund Payments

    Newmeyer Dillion Announces Jason Moberly Caruso As Its Newest Partner

    Why Federal and State Agencies are Considering Converting from a “Gallons Consumed” to a “Road Usage” Tax – And What are the Risks to the Consumer?

    Newmeyer Dillion Attorneys Named to 2020 Southern California Rising Stars List

    Contractors: Consult Your Insurance Broker Regarding Your CGL Policy

    Mitigating the Consequences of Labor Unrest on Construction Projects

    Breaking with Tradition, The Current NLRB is on a Rulemaking Tear: Election Procedures, Recognition Bar, and 9(a) Collective Bargaining Relationships

    No Coverage for Tenant's Breach of Contract Claims

    Point Taken: The UK Supreme Court Finally Confirms the General Law of Liquidated Damages (LDs)

    Professional Services Exclusion in CGL Policies

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (2/21/24) – Fed Chair Predicts More Small Bank Closures, Shopping Center Vacancies Hit 15-year Low, and Proptech Sees Mixed Results

    Home insurance perks for green-friendly design (guest post)

    ASCE and Accelerator for America Release Map to Showcase Projects from Bipartisan Infrastructure Law

    Insurance Company Must Show that Lead Came from Building Materials

    Real Estate Trends: Looking Ahead to 2021

    Defending OSHA and a Call to Action Against Funding Cuts

    Risks of Using an AI Chatbot for Legal Advice: Lessons from United States v. Heppner

    A Murder in Honduras Reveals the Dark Side of Clean Energy

    Insurer Cannot Dispose of Water Leak or Bad Faith Claims on Motion for Summary Judgment

    Greystone on Remand Denies Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment To Bar Coverage For Construction Defects

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “It’s One, Two… Eight Strikes: You’re Out!”

    A Court-Side Seat: As SCOTUS Decides Another Regulatory “Takings” Case, a Flurry of Action at EPA

    The Privilege Is All Mine: California Appellate Court Finds Law Firm Holds Attorney Work Product Privilege Applicable to Documents Created by Formerly Employed Attorney

    Meet the Forum's In-House Counsel: ERIN CANNON-WELLS

    Coverage Denied for Faulty Blasting and Improper Fill

    Withdrawal of an Admission in California May Shift Costs—Including Attorneys’ Fees—Incurred in Connection with the Withdrawal

    Disputes Over Arbitrator Qualifications: The Northern District of California Offers Some Guidance

    New Florida Bill Shortens Time for Construction-Defect Lawsuits
    Corporate Profile

    DANBURY WISCONSIN CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Danbury, Wisconsin Construction Expert Witness Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Danbury'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
    Danbury, Wisconsin

    2026 Top Business Risks for Construction and Engineering Companies

    May 26, 2026 —
    The 2026 Allianz Risk Barometer revealed some surprising findings for construction and engineering businesses. Now in its fifteenth year, this annual business risk ranking by corporate insurer Allianz Commercial incorporates the views of 3,338 global risk management professionals on the main perils on their radar for the year. Survey respondents included construction and engineering risk experts who identified the threats keeping them up at night. Here is how they ranked the top industry risks for 2026: Natural Catastrophes Natural catastrophe risk retains the top spot, with 38% of construction and engineering respondents citing this risk as their leading concern for 2026. From the insurance perspective, economic and insured losses remained high, albeit lower than the 10-year average. The evolving nature of natural catastrophes continues to pose significant challenges to businesses and the (re)insurance industry. Insured losses from natural catastrophes are set to reach $107 billion for 2025, according to Swiss Re—the sixth year in a row they have exceeded $100 billion, while economic losses are well in excess of $200 billion. Reprinted courtesy of Darren Tasker, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

    Four HHMR Attorneys Recognized in the 2027 Editions of Best Lawyers®

    September 21, 2026 —
    Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC is proud to announce that Best Lawyers® has recognized four HHMR attorneys in the 2027 editions of The Best Lawyers in America® and Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch® in America for their work in construction law and construction litigation. David M. McLain, Lisa Bondy Dunn, and Steven L. Heisdorffer earned recognition in the 2027 edition of The Best Lawyers in America®. Ricky L. Nolen, Jr. earned recognition in the 2027 edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch® in America. For a firm that has deliberately focused its practice on construction law and construction litigation for nearly 25 years, we take particular pride in seeing that focus reflected in the recognition of lawyers across different generations of HHMR. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC

    HHMR Attorneys Steve Heisdorffer and Dave McLain Named to 2026 Super Lawyers List

    April 08, 2026 —
    Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC is pleased to announce that Steve Heisdorffer and Dave McLain have been selected to the 2026 Colorado Super Lawyers list for construction litigation. Mr. Heisdorffer has been consistently recognized in recent years for his work in construction litigation and related business disputes. Mr. McLain has been recognized by Super Lawyers each year from 2020 through 2026, following his earlier inclusion on the Rising Stars list from 2009 through 2012. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC

    Louisiana Legislature Enacts Act 932 – Significant Changes to Insurer Bad-Faith Exposure for Failure to Settle

    July 13, 2026 —
    The Louisiana Legislature has enacted Act 932 (formerly House Bill 1162), which became law this week without the Governor's signature pursuant to the Louisiana Constitution, after expiration of the applicable constitutional review period. Act 932 makes several important amendments to Louisiana's insurer bad-faith statute and appears intended, at least in part, to address issues arising from the Louisiana Supreme Court's decision in Kelly v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., 169 So.3d 328 (La. 2015). The Act also makes changes regarding claim payments involving licensed contractors. The Act takes effect on August 1, 2026. Key Takeaways Act 932:
    • Limits certain bad-faith causes of action (bad faith failure to settle) involving personal injury and bodily injury claims where good-faith disputes exist or where an insurer has not been afforded sufficient opportunity to respond to a settlement demand.
    • Requires insurers and adjusters to verify a contractor's Louisiana license status before issuing claim payments when a contractor is named as a payee on a check for repair or restoration of immovable property.
    • Creates a statutory safe harbor protecting insurers from bad-faith penalties and attorney fees when payment delays result from an inability to verify a contractor's license, provided specified documentation and notice requirements are met.
    Reprinted courtesy of Tabitha R. Durbin, Lewis Brisbois and Jennifer E. Michel, Lewis Brisbois Ms. Durbin may be contacted at Tabitha.Durbin@lewisbrisbois.com Ms. Michel may be contacted at Jenny.Michel@lewisbrisbois.com Read the full story...

    D.C. Circuit Upholds EPA’s CERCLA Hazardous-Substance Designations for PFAS as State-Law Settlements Highlight Expanding Liability Landscape

    September 15, 2026 —
    On August 18, 2026, a unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld the 2024 designation by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) as hazardous substances under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund). (See Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al. v. EPA, No. 24-1193 (D.C. Cir. Aug. 18, 2026).) The decision leaves EPA’s PFOA and PFOS hazardous substance designations in place and provides guidance on the scope of EPA’s authority to make future hazardous substances designations under CERCLA Section 102(a). The decision also likely resolves a challenge to the rule that has spanned two presidential administrations. After taking office, the Trump administration had obtained an abeyance of the litigation challenging the Biden-era rule while EPA reconsidered its position. In September 2025, EPA informed the court that it had decided to retain the designations, while signaling that it would work with Congress and industry to address CERCLA liability concerns for “passive receivers.” The litigation then resumed, with the current Administration defending the rule. Reprinted courtesy of Ashleigh K. Myers, Pillsbury, Amanda G. Halter, Pillsbury, Jillian Marullo, Pillsbury and Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury Ms. Myers may be contacted at ashleigh.myers@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Halter may be contacted at amanda.halter@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Marullo may be contacted at jillian.marullo@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com Read the full story...

    Partner Bryan Stofferahn and Our Walnut Creek Team Secure Summary Judgment in a $28 Million Premises Liability Case!

    September 15, 2026 —
    BWB&O is proud to announce that Partner Bryan Stofferahn and the Walnut Creek Team secured a Summary Judgment on behalf of the firm’s clients, resulting in a complete dismissal of a negligence and premises liability claim. Plaintiff, a teenager, was riding his bicycle on private commercial property when he was struck by a vehicle. Plaintiff was in a coma for 6 weeks and developed major neurocognitive dysfunction from a traumatic brain injury. BWB&O’s clients are a commercial property owner and property management company, who Plaintiff contended were liable for his injuries based on the design, condition, operation, and management of the premises. Plaintiff had demanded $28 million in settlement of the claims against all defendants. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara, LLP

    New Law Prompts ABC Minnesota/North Dakota to Design New Telecommunications Safety Training Program

    June 29, 2026 —
    On the first day of the year, a Minnesota law requiring installers of underground telecommunication infrastructure broadband, fiber or phone lines (when projects utilize directional drilling, and/or work is being conducted within 10 feet of existing utilities) to undergo a 40-hour certification went into effect. Originally passed in mid-2024 and proposed to go into effect in July 2025, the law’s requirements were postponed until January 2026, giving ABC Minnesota/North Dakota—in partnership with NCCER and the Minnesota Cable Communications Association—time to roll out their Safety Qualified Underground Telecommunications Installer training program, which would ensure the workforce of their contractor members were certified. Reprinted courtesy of Grace Calengor, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

    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