BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction expert witness Marathon County Wisconsin condominiums expert witness Marathon County Wisconsin custom homes expert witness Marathon County Wisconsin multi family housing expert witness Marathon County Wisconsin parking structure expert witness Marathon County Wisconsin townhome construction expert witness Marathon County Wisconsin Subterranean parking expert witness Marathon County Wisconsin condominium expert witness Marathon County Wisconsin housing expert witness Marathon County Wisconsin tract home expert witness Marathon County Wisconsin retail construction expert witness Marathon County Wisconsin low-income housing expert witness Marathon County Wisconsin concrete tilt-up expert witness Marathon County Wisconsin office building expert witness Marathon County Wisconsin structural steel construction expert witness Marathon County Wisconsin mid-rise construction expert witness Marathon County Wisconsin custom home expert witness Marathon County Wisconsin institutional building expert witness Marathon County Wisconsin Medical building expert witness Marathon County Wisconsin high-rise construction expert witness Marathon County Wisconsin hospital construction expert witness Marathon County Wisconsin casino resort expert witness Marathon County Wisconsin
    Marathon County Wisconsin concrete expert witnessMarathon County Wisconsin construction code expert witnessMarathon County Wisconsin construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessMarathon County Wisconsin building envelope expert witnessMarathon County Wisconsin expert witness windowsMarathon County Wisconsin stucco expert witnessMarathon County Wisconsin architect expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Marathon County, 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 Marathon County 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
    Wausau Area Builders Association
    Local # 5172
    141 W Thomas St
    Wausau, WI 54401

    Marathon County Wisconsin Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Marathon County Wisconsin Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Marathon County Wisconsin Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Marathon County Wisconsin Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Wolf River Builders Association
    Local # 5193
    PO Box 595
    Shawano, WI 54166
    Marathon County Wisconsin Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Brown County Home Builders Association
    Local # 5124
    PO Box 13194 811 Packerland Drive
    Green Bay, WI 54307

    Marathon County Wisconsin Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Golden Sands Home Builders Association
    Local # 5118
    1001 Theater Dr
    Plover, WI 54467

    Marathon County Wisconsin Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Marathon County Wisconsin


    BHA Has a Nice Swing

    LLMs in Construction: Where They Fail and Where They Shine

    Maine Case Demonstrates High Risk for Buying Home “As Is”

    North Carolina Supreme Court Addresses “Trigger of Coverage,” Allocation and Exhaustion-Related Issues Arising Out of Benzene-Related Claims

    Insured's Complaint Against Flood Insurer Survives Motion to Dismiss

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

    Missouri Legislature Passes Bill to Drastically Change Missouri’s “Consent Judgment” Statute

    How Mobile Tools Are Capturing Safety Data on Jobsites

    Georgia Update: Automatic Renewals in Consumer Service Contracts

    New Jersey Supreme Court Rules that Subcontractor Work with Resultant Damage is both an “Occurrence” and “Property Damage” under a Standard Form CGL Policy

    ACCL Reaffirms Core Legal Principle: Lawyers Must Not Be Punished for Representing Their Clients

    The Enforceability of “Pay-If-Paid” Provisions Affirmed in New Jersey

    Colorado SB 15-177 UPDATE: Senate Business, Labor, & Technology Committee Refers Construction Defect Reform Bill to Full Senate

    Are “Financial Hardship” Damages Recoverable?

    Ohio subcontractor work exception to the “your work” exclusion

    Liability Cap Does Not Exclude Defense Costs for Loss Related to Deep Water Horizon

    School Blown Down by Wind Still Set to Open on Schedule

    When is a “Notice of Completion” on a California Private Works Construction Project Valid? Why Does It Matter for My Collection Rights?

    A Court-Side Seat: SCOTUS Clarifies Alien Tort Statute and WOTUS Is Revisited

    Facts about Chinese Drywall in Construction

    “Number nine, Number nine…”: Newark Trial Team Obtains “No Cause” Verdict in Ninth Trial of Year

    Motion to Dismiss COVID Claim Granted in Part, Denied in Part

    Prevailing Parties Entitled to Contractual Attorneys’ Fees Under California CCP §1717 Notwithstanding Declaration That Contract is Void Under California Government Code §1090

    Court Finds That Limitation on Conditional Use Permit Results in Covered Property Damage Due to Loss of Use

    Five Payne & Fears Attorneys Named 2026 Southern California Super Lawyers

    Mercury News Editorial Calls for Investigation of Bay Bridge Construction

    2016 Hawaii Legislature Enacts Five Insurance-Related Bills

    EPC Contractors Procuring from Foreign Companies need to Reconsider their Contracts

    William Lyon Homes Unites with Polygon Northwest Company

    Dump Site Provider Has Valid Little Miller Act Claim

    Appeal of an Attorney Disqualification Order Results in Partial Automatic Stay of Trial Court Proceedings

    “You Can’t Make Me Pay!”

    AB 1701 Has Passed – Developers and General Contractors Are Now Required to Double Pay for Labor Due to Their Subcontractors’ Failure to Pay

    Washington Court of Appeals Divisions Clash Over Interpretations of the Statute of Repose

    Toolbox Talk Series: GenAI Document Review

    Well-Insulated: Predict the Unpredictable Construction Costs

    Coverage Found For Cleanup of Superfund Site Despite Pollution Exclusion

    Federal Public Works Construction Collection Remedies: The Miller Act Payment Bond Claim

    Does the Recording of a Mechanic’s Lien Memorandum by Itself Constitute Process? Read to Find Out

    Insurer's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings for Construction Defect Claim Rejected

    NY Gov. Sets Industry Advisory Council to Fix Public Contracts Process

    North Dakota Supreme Court Clarifies Breadth of Contractual Liability Coverage

    Ball Janik LLP Elevates Construction Litigation Attorneys Keegan A. Berry and Nicholas B. Vargo to Partner

    Policyholders' Coverage Checklist in Times of Coronavirus

    Considerations in Obtaining a Mechanic’s Lien in Maryland (Don’t try this at home)

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

    Agree First or it May Cost You Later

    The Future of Construction Defects in Utah Unclear

    Inverse Condemnation and Roadwork

    A Customized Approach to Data Center Construction
    Corporate Profile

    MARATHON COUNTY WISCONSIN CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Marathon County, Wisconsin 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 Marathon 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
    Marathon County, Wisconsin

    Tampa Team Obtains Highly Favorable Verdict for Property Owner Client in Lawsuit over Traffic Accident

    March 24, 2026 —
    Tampa Managing Partner John Rine and Partner Nick Dareneau obtained a very favorable verdict for their property owner client in a Sarasota County trial in a lawsuit arising from a traffic accident. At the end of closing arguments, plaintiff’s counsel requested appropriately $18 million from the jury. The jury returned a net verdict of just over a thousand dollars. The plaintiff was on a scooter and was involved in an accident with an SUV in a parking lot intersection. Our firm represented the property owner. The plaintiffs argued that the landscape vegetation was too tall and violated the sight lines of the two drivers, and that the height of the shrubbery violated the owner’s landscaping contract and a local sight line ordinance. They also argued that the intersection lacked a stop sign in contrast to the other six parking lot entrances, which had stop signs. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Surety Liability Is Coextensive with Its Bond Principal

    April 14, 2026 —
    A recent Miller act payment bond case, U.S. f/u/b/o Whitetail General Constructors v. Northcon, Inc., 2026 WL 46671 (D.Mont. 2026), contains a short noteworthy discussion as to a surety’s liability being coextensive with that of its bond principal. If you are bonded, or you are pursuing a bond, you need to appreciate this, which is why this is a noteworthy discussion:
    A “surety’s liability on a Miller Act bond must be at least coextensive with the obligations imposed by the Act if the bond is to have its intended effect.” “Therefore, ‘the liability of a surety and its principal on a Miller Act payment bond is coextensive with the contractual liability of the principal only to the extent that it is consistent with the rights and obligations created under the Miller Act.’” In other words, “[w]here a subcontract’s terms are consistent with the Miller Act’s provisions, the surety’s liability on the Miller Act bond is coextensive with the contractual liability of its princip[al].”
    “The liability of a surety under the Miller Act is controlled by federal law, rather than state contract law[.]” The court may, however, “look to state law when interpreting contractual provisions” in a Miller Act case.
    “[T]he measure of recovery under the Miller Act is generally determined by the terms of the subcontract [or underlying contract].”
    Northcon, supra, at *4-5 (internal citations omitted).
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    AI Data Centers Become City-Scale Infrastructure, Prompting New Industry Playbook

    August 11, 2026 —
    AI data centers are no longer just buildings. They are increasingly reaching power-demand levels more commonly associated with municipalities, prompting industry groups to launch a new framework they say is needed to keep pace with rapidly changing power, cooling and reliability requirements. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bryan Gottlieb, Engineering News-Record
    Mr. Gottlieb may be contacted at gottliebb@enr.com

    How to Fireproof a Neighborhood

    March 17, 2026 —
    As builders in fire-prone areas like California race to reimagine homes for a more fiery future, one developer is zooming out to build entire fire-resilient neighborhoods. KB Home’s developments tackle an issue that’s hard for any individual homeowner to overcome: “You can do your home perfectly, but if your neighbor didn’t, you still have a fire risk,” said Roy Wright, chief executive officer of the research nonprofit Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety. In other words, to slow the spread of urban fires it takes a village. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Linda Poon, Bloomberg

    Amended Again?! Critical Changes to RPAPL § 881: What New York Contractors and Construction Managers Need to Know

    March 10, 2026 —
    Recent amendments to New York’s RPAPL § 881 will significantly change how project teams obtain and maintain access to adjoining properties for construction-related work. The 2025 amendment signed into law by Governor Hochul, and the newly enacted 2026 revisions, will directly impact general contractors (GCs) and construction managers (CMs), as well as their trade contractors who regularly confront neighbor‑access, support‑of‑excavation, and protection‑of‑adjoining‑property challenges. Although we do not advise that GCs and CMs get involved in the “weeds” of license agreements or the prosecution of an action to obtain access pursuant to an RPAPL § 881 action, which are typically owner responsibilities, GCs and CMs should understand the change in law, as there may be circumstances where they are responsible for securing access. This alert outlines the key statutory changes and explains the operational, scheduling, insurance, and risk‑management implications for the New York construction industry. Reprinted courtesy of Mark A. Snyder, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and David Polazzi, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Snyder may be contacted at msnyder@pecklaw.com Mr. Polazzi may be contacted at dpolazzi@pecklaw.com Read the full story...

    Jenny Michel Named Top Lawyer by Acadiana Profile Magazine

    June 29, 2026 —
    Lafayette Managing Partner Jenny Michel has been named to Acadiana Profile magazine’s 2026 Top Lawyers list for Insurance Law. The annual list honors excellence across several practice areas. To select attorneys for its Top Lawyers list, Acadiana Profile works with a research firm that conducts a peer-review survey of attorneys in the Acadiana, Louisiana region. The attorneys nominate fellow professionals who they consider the best in their field of practice. Ms. Michel is co-chair of the London Market Group, the Pollution Legal Liability/Environmental Impairment Liability (PLL/EIL) practice, and the Energy, Marine & Power practice. She has worked with London insurers her entire career. Licensed in both Louisiana and Texas, she leads a team of experienced attorneys focused on marine, both traditional and alternate energy, onshore and offshore property, trucking and environmental insurance coverage and bad faith claims, excess monitoring, advice and litigation, both at the trial and appellate levels. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    That’s a Wrap! Pennsylvania Court Holds Arbitration Clause in Online Agreement Unenforceable

    May 14, 2026 —
    In Duffy v. Tatum, 2026 Pa. Super. LEXIS 112, 2026 PA Super 41, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania (Superior Court) considered whether an arbitration provision contained in the online Terms of Service on the defendant’s website were enforceable. The plaintiff, Daniel Duffy (Duffy), visited the website of defendant, Dolly, Inc. (Dolly), to purchase moving services. Duffy selected the number of movers, items to be moved and the type of vehicle needed. To complete the booking, the website required Duffy to checkmark a box labeled “By checking this box I accept the Dolly Terms of Service.” Duffy did not have to open the link or scroll to the bottom of the agreement before being able to click on the checkmark box. The Terms of Service included an arbitration provision requiring that any dispute related to the moving services to be resolved by arbitration in accordance with the American Arbitration Association. The Terms of Service did not include any statement that the user was waiving the right to a jury trial. The Superior Court found the internet Terms of Service unenforceable. During the moving process, an accident occurred and injured Duffy. In May 2024, Duffy and his wife sued Dolly and other related entities alleging negligence and loss of consortium. Dolly filed preliminary objections alleging that the parties agreed to alternative dispute resolution. The lower court overruled the preliminary objections, finding that Dolly’s website did not provide reasonably obvious notice of its Terms of Service to Duffy and, as such, Duffy never agreed to waive his constructional right to a jury trial. Dolly filed an appeal to the Superior Court. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com

    No Bad Faith Despite Insurer’s Appraisal Award Exceeding Initial Payment

    August 03, 2026 —
    The federal district court granted the insurer’s motion for summary judgment, finding no bad faith despite the appraisal award exceeding the amount the insurer initially paid. Jazi Kat 4659 Rockridge LLC, et al. v. Travelers Cas. Ins. Co. of Am., et al., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105634 (D. Ariz. May 13, 2026). Plaintiffs sued Travelers for breach of contract and bad faith, alleging that Travelers failed to pay money plaintiffs were owed under the policy. Plaintiffs held a commercial property policy for two properties. A fire destroyed one of the properties. Travelers adjusted the claim and issued two payments. Plaintiffs disagreed with the amount of the payments and demanded an appraisal. Travelers agreed to the appraisal. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com