BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking expert witness Lukeville Arizona landscaping construction expert witness Lukeville Arizona production housing expert witness Lukeville Arizona concrete tilt-up expert witness Lukeville Arizona hospital construction expert witness Lukeville Arizona custom home expert witness Lukeville Arizona low-income housing expert witness Lukeville Arizona Medical building expert witness Lukeville Arizona multi family housing expert witness Lukeville Arizona high-rise construction expert witness Lukeville Arizona retail construction expert witness Lukeville Arizona tract home expert witness Lukeville Arizona mid-rise construction expert witness Lukeville Arizona housing expert witness Lukeville Arizona custom homes expert witness Lukeville Arizona structural steel construction expert witness Lukeville Arizona condominiums expert witness Lukeville Arizona casino resort expert witness Lukeville Arizona office building expert witness Lukeville Arizona parking structure expert witness Lukeville Arizona institutional building expert witness Lukeville Arizona industrial building expert witness Lukeville Arizona
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Lukeville, Arizona

    Arizona Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: (HB 2620; ARS §12-1363, 1361, 1364) Current laws on the books require a purchaser of a home to provide written notice at least 90 days before commencing legal action. This gives the homebuilder time to inspect, repair or replace the defect if it falls within the specifications of the warranty. Homebuilder has 60 days to respond to written notice which may include offer to replace, repair or offer monetary compensationSB 1311 is a similar statute that covers multi-family dwellings. If no resolution is met through alternative dispute resolution procedures and a civil lawsuit is filed, the seller’s insurance company must treat a notice of a dwelling action as a notice of a claim subject to the insurance policy without affecting available coverage under the policy


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Lukeville Arizona

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License required to bid or contract.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Southern Arizona Home Builders Association
    Local # 0335
    2840 N Country Club Rd Ste 100
    Tucson, AZ 85716
    http://www.sahba.org

    Home Builders Association of Central Arizona
    Local # 0310
    16430 N Scottsdale Road Suite 150
    Scottsdale, AZ 85254
    http://www.hbaca.org

    Northern Arizona Builders Association
    Local # 0315
    1500 E Cedar Ave Suite 86
    Flagstaff, AZ 86004
    http://www.nazba.org


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Lukeville Arizona

    Attorneys’ Fees and the American Arbitration Association Rule

    Differing Site Conditions: What to Expect from the Court When You Encounter the Unexpected

    Canada to Ban Foreigners From Buying Homes as Prices Soar

    Is Solar the Next Focus of Construction Defect Suits?

    The Unwavering Un-waivable Implied Warranty of Workmanship and Habitability in Arizona

    Contractor’s Coverage For Additional Insured Established by Unilateral Contract

    NTSB Cites Design Errors in Fatal Bridge Collapse

    Employer’s Liability Exclusion Bars Coverage

    Kahana Feld Secures Discontinuance with Prejudice in Fraudulent Case

    Honoring Veterans Under Our Roof & Across the World

    New Jersey Rules that Forensic Lab Analysts Can’t be Forced to Testify

    Ninth Circuit Reverses Grant of Summary Judgment to Insurer For Fortuitous Loss

    Crowdfunding Comes to Manhattan’s World Trade Center

    Manhattan Developer Breaks Ground on $520 Million Project

    Insurance Policies and Indemnity Provisions Are Not the Same

    Georgia Federal Court Holds That Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage Under Liability Policy for Claims Arising From Discharge of PFAS Into Waterways

    Contractors Board May Discipline Over Workers’ Comp Reporting

    Regional US Airports Are Back After Years of Decay

    Wisconsin “property damage” caused by an “occurrence.”

    Snell & Wilmer Receives Multiple National and Regional Top Tier Rankings in 2026 “Best Law Firms® Rankings” by Best Lawyers®

    Clearly Determining in Contract Who Determines Arbitrability of Dispute

    Lump Sum Subcontract? Perhaps Not.

    Texas School System Goes to Court over Construction Defect

    Real-Estate Pros Fight NYC Tax on Wealthy Absentee Owners

    Connecticut Federal District Court Again Finds "Collapse" Provisions Ambiguous

    Texas City Pulls Plug on Fossil Fuels With Shift to Solar

    Construction Contracts Need Amending Post COVID-19 Shutdowns

    Hawaii Federal District Rejects Another Construction Defect Claim

    Measure Of Damages for Breach of Construction Contract

    Canada's Ex-Attorney General Set to Testify About SNC-Lavalin Scandal

    If You Get ‘Reported to the Board’ for Your Professional License (Law Note)

    Suit Limitation Provision Upheld

    World Cup May Pull Out of Brazil because of Construction Delays

    Lease-Leaseback Battle Continues as First District Court of Appeals Sides with Contractor and School District

    Mich. AG Says Straits of Mackinac Tunnel Deal Unconstitutional

    What Makes a Great Lawyer?

    US Moves to Come Clean on PFAS in Drinking Water

    Federal Judge Dismisses Insurance Coverage Lawsuit In Construction Defect Case

    Update Regarding McMillin Albany LLC v. Super Ct.

    Trump Sues Casinos to Get Conditions Fixed or Name Off

    Construction Employment Rose in 38 States from 2013 to 2014

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Additional Insured in Construction Defect Case

    Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell Recognized in 2024 Best Law FirmÂŽ Rankings

    Tropical Storms Pile Up Back-to-Back-to-Back Out West

    Ontario Court of Appeal Clarifies the Meaning of "Living in the Same Household" for Purposes of Coverage Under a Homeowners Policy

    Mitigating the Consequences of Labor Unrest on Construction Projects

    Use of Dispute Review Boards in the Construction Process

    Digitalizing Cross-Laminated Timber Construction

    Montana Court Finds Duty to Defend over Construction Defect Allegation

    Vermont Supreme Court Finds COVID-19 May Damage Property
    Corporate Profile

    LUKEVILLE ARIZONA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Through over four thousand construction and design related expert designations, the Lukeville, Arizona Construction Expert Directory provides a wide range of trial support and construction consulting services to construction claims professionals concerned with construction defect, scheduling, and delay claims. BHA provides construction related litigation support and expert witness services to the industry's leading construction practice groups, Fortune 500 builders, insurers, owners, as well as a variety of public entities. Employing in house assets which include licensed architects, civil engineers, building envelope experts, general and specialty contractors focused on the evaluation of construction claims, the organization brings national experience and local capabilities to Lukeville and the surrounding areas.

    Lukeville Arizona building code expert witnessLukeville Arizona construction defect expert witnessLukeville Arizona structural engineering expert witnessesLukeville Arizona building code compliance expert witnessLukeville Arizona expert witness roofingLukeville Arizona building consultant expertLukeville Arizona architectural engineering expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Lukeville, Arizona

    Georgia HB 676: A Bill Property Owners and Contractors Should Watch

    March 24, 2026 —
    Property owners, contractors, and others dealing with mechanics and materialmen’s liens in Georgia should keep an eye on HB 676, which is currently making its way through the Georgia General Assembly. The bill aims to curb misuse of the lien process and provide additional remedies to those challenging a frivolous lien filing. What HB 676 Would Do HB 676 would add a new Code section (O.C.G.A. § 44-14-366.6) to the mechanics and materialmen’s lien statutes. If a lien is filed “without substantial justification or that is not made in good faith or that is made with malice or a wrongful purpose,” this new Code section would impose a fine of $1,500 per lien on the lien claimant, in addition to any attorney’s fees or court costs incurred by the party challenging the lien. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Robert Lafayette, Seyfarth Shaw LLP
    Mr. Lafayette may be contacted at rlafayette@seyfarth.com

    Massachusetts Construction Industry Continues to Wait While Prompt Payment Law Is Put to the Test

    March 31, 2026 —
    Earlier this month, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) heard argument in J.C. Cannistraro, LLC v. Columbia Construction Co. et al., a dispute concerning the state’s Prompt Payment Act (PPA). Although a decision has yet to be issued, it could potentially pose widespread implications for high-value private construction projects moving forward – and perhaps backwards. The PPA, G. L. c. 149, § 29E, enacted by the Massachusetts Legislature in 2010, has become a keystone in the construction industry. It was enacted to address, in part, downstream cash flow issues that tend to pervade construction projects by mandating a series of strict guidelines for submitting, and responding to, payment applications for private projects valued over $3,000,000. Amongst these requirements are set timeframes to respond to an application, as well as what must be contained in an application rejection. Critically, if an owner or upper-tier contractor fails to fully comply with all the statutory requirements in response to a proper payment application, the application is automatically “deemed to be approved” and payable. Significantly, however, this is not always the end of the line. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Catherine Maronski, Robinson Cole
    Ms. Maronski may be contacted at cmaronski@rc.com

    Congratulations to Reno Partner Karen Baytosh for Securing a Complete Dismissal via a Motion for Summary Judgment

    July 13, 2026 —
    BWB&O is proud to announce that Reno Partner Karen Baytosh received a significant victory on behalf of the firm’s Developer Client in a high-exposure personal injury matter. Plaintiff, a teenager, was struck by an intoxicated driver while walking her dog at night, sustaining catastrophic injuries requiring 24-hour critical care for the remainder of her life. Plaintiff’s Guardian brought suit against the drunk driver and her husband, the City, and BWB&O’s Developer Clients, alleging that the City and Developers failed to improve street lighting and install a sidewalk that would have prevented the accident. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Kahana Feld Obtains Favorable Result in High-Exposure NY Premises Liability Case

    June 15, 2026 —
    Kahana Feld partner Leigh Katz obtained a significant victory in a recent matter involving a videotaped alleged trip and fall on the sidewalk in front of the client’s commercial residence. The plaintiff claimed he suffered a knee injury that necessitated surgery, along with other assorted injuries that prevented him from continuing high-level athletic activities. Leigh was able to demonstrate that the fall was staged and received a voluntary discontinuance with prejudice. At mediation, Leigh emphasized that KF’s expert witness challenged the plaintiff’s claim that the fall was caused by a sidewalk height differential after reviewing the videotape footage and determining the plaintiff’s fall began before his feet made contact with the alleged defect. Based on this analysis, the expert concluded the reported height differential did not initiate the fall, which supported KF’s position that the incident depicted in the video was unrealistic and appeared staged. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Leigh Katz, Kahana Feld
    Ms. Katz may be contacted at lkatz@kahanafeld.com

    Modular Construction’s Hidden Risk: Where Things Go Wrong Between the Factory and the Field

    June 15, 2026 —
    Introduction As modular and prefabricated construction methods are increasingly adopted, so too are the potential challenges that come with them. The appeal is straightforward: faster timelines, controlled fabrication environments, and reduced on-site labor demands. But the risks that accompany these benefits are often less clear—and, in many cases, poorly defined. For example, what happens when a prefabricated component is delayed past its installation window? Who is responsible for a defect discovered inside a sealed, installed module? What happens to warranty obligations when a prefabricated component must be modified on site? Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jack Mayo, Jones Walker LLP
    Mr. Mayo may be contacted at jmayo@joneswalker.com

    Samuel Alhadeff Represents LGI Homes in Acquisition and Re-Entitlement of Maravilla Estates

    July 06, 2026 —
    Temecula Partner Samuel Alhadeff recently represented LGI Homes in its acquisition and re-entitlement of Maravilla Estates, a 169-lot active adult community located in San Jacinto, California. The acquisition and re-entitlement of the project provide LGI Homes with the opportunity to deliver much-needed age-qualified housing in one of Riverside County's growing residential markets. The community includes a recorded final map and finished lots, as well as future development inventory and planned amenities, positioning the project for continued development and completion. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Supreme Court Strikes Down IEEPA Tariffs: The Refund Process Will Be Messy

    March 10, 2026 —
    On February 20, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, and the consolidated case Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, Inc., that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not authorize the President to impose tariffs unilaterally.1 The decision invalidates both the “reciprocal” tariffs and the drug-trafficking tariffs imposed under IEEPA. For importers, the immediate question is whether, how, and when refunds can actually be obtained. On that issue, the U.S. Supreme Court provided no roadmap. To the contrary, the dissent warned that the United States “may be required to refund billions of dollars,” that the process is likely to be a “mess,” and that the majority opinion “says nothing today about whether, and if so how, the Government should go about returning the billions of dollars that it has collected from importers.” Reprinted courtesy of Brett W. Johnson, Snell & Wilmer, Derek Flint, Snell & Wilmer, T. Troy Galan, Snell & Wilmer and Thomas Williams, Snell & Wilmer Mr. Johnson may be contacted at bwjohnson@swlaw.com Mr. Flint may be contacted at dflint@swlaw.com Mr. Galan may be contacted at tgalan@swlaw.com Mr. Williams may be contacted at twilliams@swlaw.com> Read the full story...

    Midwest Team Secures Resolution of Matter for Homeowners’ Association Client, Recovery of Attorneys’ Fees

    February 10, 2026 —
    Kansas City/Wichita Partner Alan L. Rupe and Kansas City Associate Delaney McCoy recently achieved a victory on behalf of their client, a homeowners’ association that was sued after denying a solar panel application. The plaintiff homeowners challenged the association’s decision in court, and after extensive—and costly—litigation, the court ultimately determined that the dispute was not yet ripe for judicial review. With that threshold issue resolved, the parties were able to work collaboratively to address the solar panel matter itself. But one significant question remained: whether the association was entitled to recover its legal fees under the declaration, despite the American Rule, which generally requires each party to bear its own costs. The client felt understandably taken advantage of because this issue could—and should—have been resolved without litigation. Considerable time and resources were diverted from the community for the advantage of a single household, so the Lewis Brisbois team continued to advocate for the association’s contractual right to recover fees. After oral argument, the Court agreed, enforcing the fee‑shifting provisions in the governing documents and ruling in favor of the homeowners’ association. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois