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

    Colorado Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: HB 1161 has three significant components that effect construction defect litigation. The first is a right to remedy and notice provision (75 days written notice) The homeowner must give the builder a notice that describes the nature of the claimed construction defects, the location of the defects and a general description of the type of damages that are claimed. The second component is a limitation on the nature and type of damages that can be pursued and awarded in a construction defect case. The third is a limitation on the availability and amount of punitive damages ($250,000) under the provisions of the Colorado Consumer Protection Act


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Capulin Colorado

    State license required for electrical, asbestos removal, plumbers, and pesticides trade; no state license for general contracting. Licensing may be required on a city or county level.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Four Corners Chapter
    Local # 0655
    PO Box TL
    Cortez, CO 81321
    http://hbamontdolores.com

    Builders Association of Pagosa Springs
    Local # 0698
    PO Box 3956
    Pagosa Springs, CO 81147
    http://www.pagosabuilders.com

    Home Builders Association of Southwest Co Inc
    Local # 0683
    1199 Main Ave #234
    Durango, CO 81301
    http://www.hbasc.com

    Home Builders Association of the Upper Rio Grande
    Local # 0679
    PO Box 1210
    South Fork, CO 81154
    http://www.hbaurg.com

    Pueblo Associated Home Builders
    Local # 0675
    635 West Corona Ave Suite 101
    Pueblo, CO 81004
    http://www.homebuilderspueblo.org

    Housing & Builders Association Of Colorado Springs
    Local # 0625
    4585 Hilton Pkwy Ste 100
    Colorado Springs, CO 80907
    http://www.cshba.com

    Home Builders Association of Teller Co
    Local # 0690
    PO Box 713
    Woodland Park, CO 80866
    http://www.hbatellercounty.com/


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Capulin Colorado
    Corporate Profile

    CAPULIN COLORADO CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 4500 construction and design related expert witness designations, the Capulin, Colorado Construction Expert Directory provides a streamlined multi-disciplinary expert retention and support solution to builders, risk managers, and construction practice groups seeking effective resolution of construction defect, scheduling, and delay claims. BHA provides construction related trial support and expert consulting services to the nation's leading construction practice groups, Fortune 500 builders, general liability carriers, owners, as well as a variety of public entities. Employing in house resources which comprise licensed architects, registered professional engineers, ASPE certified professional estimators, ICC Certified inspection and testing professionals, the firm brings specialized expertise and local capabilities to the Capulin region.

    Capulin Colorado construction expert witnessesCapulin Colorado roofing and waterproofing expert witnessCapulin Colorado consulting engineersCapulin Colorado testifying construction expert witnessCapulin Colorado construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessCapulin Colorado hospital construction expert witnessCapulin Colorado concrete expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Capulin, Colorado

    Fatalities Edge Down: New Data Reveals a Promising Decline

    April 27, 2026 —
    Construction fatalities in the United States declined slightly in 2024, according to new data released from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The sector recorded just over 1,000 worker deaths last year—a modest decrease from the previous year but still among the highest totals of any industry. Falls remained the leading cause of death, accounting for roughly one-third of all construction fatalities. Transportation incidents—including workers struck by vehicles or equipment—ranked second, followed by contact with objects or equipment and electrocutions. Reprinted courtesy of Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

    Bona Fide Dispute Defeats Violation of Prompt Payment Act

    June 15, 2026 —
    Most, if not all, jurisdictions, including the federal government, have what is known as a “Prompt Payment Act.” The objective is to ensure prompt payment. If prompt payment is not made, the Prompt Payment Act provides for interest penalties, as well as potentially other costs such as attorney’s fees. But the thing is, it’s not as simple as untimely payment to support the recourse and interest penalties the applicable Prompt Payment Act affords. And the teeth associated with the applicable Prompt Payment Act are not as sharp as perhaps the party claiming untimely payment prefers. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Arbitration in Construction Disputes: Process and Best Practices

    July 27, 2026 —
    Arbitration in construction disputes is a private process where owners, contractors, subcontractors, designers or suppliers present claims to one or more neutral arbitrators instead of taking the dispute through court. The arbitrator reviews evidence, hears testimony and issues a decision that is usually binding. Construction arbitration is common because project disputes are technical, document-heavy and time-sensitive. Claims may involve schedule delays, disputed change orders, defective work, differing site conditions, payment, termination, indemnity, surety issues or professional liability. Arbitration can be faster and more specialized than litigation, but speed is not guaranteed. Poor contract language, broad discovery, weak records and unclear damages can make arbitration expensive. Reprinted courtesy of Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

    The Grenfell & Champlain Towers: Risk Management Considerations in the Wake of Catastrophic Loss — A UK/US Comparison

    June 02, 2026 —
    1. Introduction As part of the multinational collaborative relationship between Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Fenchurch Law, we continually find ourselves in conversations about the sometimes subtle but sometimes drastic differences between risk management and coverage considerations from one country to the next. These differences are often highlighted by the fallout from large catastrophic losses that are widely publicized and illuminate sometimes widespread risks and perils that many others may be facing in the coming years. The response of governments and their subdivisions to the needs of victims and/or commercial parties, and insurance markets’ evaluation of and reactions to catastrophic losses vary widely from country to country and jurisdiction. In this article, we discuss these responses and reactions in the cases of the Grenfell Tower Fire in London, England, and the Champlain Tower collapse in Surfside, Florida, within the United States. These two widely publicized losses involved different risk management and insurance considerations based on where they occurred. They also saw substantially different government responses and raised varied questions about what the next steps are for their respective commercial and insurance markets. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Eric M. Clarkson, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Clarkson may be contacted at EClarkson@sdvlaw.com

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

    July 20, 2026 —
    The insurer’s motion for summary judgment seeking to eliminate the insured’s claims for damage from a water leak, bad faith and punitive damages failed. Nargizyan v, State Farm General Ins. Co., 2026 Cal App. LEXIS 302 (Cal. Ct. App. April 15, 2026). The insured noticed tiles on his kitchen floor were warmer than usual. He found water dripping from the top of the crawl space under the house. He noticed water was “dripping in different places” but not pouring like a faucet. “There were too many places to count where water was dripping and there was water all over the place.” Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Pay-If-Paid: What You Need to Know Before Signing on the Dotted Line

    August 03, 2026 —
    Buried deep in the fine print of a subcontract, a pay-if-paid clause may be looming. If you are a subcontractor or supplier, misreading these clauses can put your cash flow at risk. If you are an owner or general contractor, drafting them incorrectly can leave you with obligations you never intended — or unenforceable protections you were counting on. It is more important than ever to understand when pay-if-paid clauses hold up and when they do not, as well as recent litigation and drafting trends. Whether you are negotiating a new agreement, reviewing your standard form contracts, or staring down a payment dispute, understanding how Arizona law treats pay-if-paid clauses is essential. In this article, we break down key considerations, walk through the legal standards Arizona courts apply, and offer practical tips to consider to help you protect your payment rights on the next project. Reprinted courtesy of Christian Fernandez, Snell & Wilmer and Matthew Racioppo, Snell & Wilmer Mr. Fernandez may be contacted at cfernandez@swlaw.com Mr. Racioppo may be contacted at mracioppo@swlaw.com 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

    Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith Practice Earns Prestigious Band One Ranking in the Chambers USA 2026 Guide

    June 22, 2026 —
    White and Williams LLP's Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith Practice Group is pleased to share that it has received a Band One ranking in the Chambers USA 2026 Guide for Insurance, Pennsylvania. Additionally, Patricia B. Santelle, Chair Emeritus, Randy Maniloff, Partner, and Robert Walsh, Partner have all been individually ranked on the Chambers USA 2026 Guide in Insurance in Pennsylvania. The Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith Practice's consistent focus on their clients and handling of complex claims were just two of the attributes contributing to their elite Band One ranking, after 11 years on the Chambers USA list. When asked about their experience working with White and Williams’ Pennsylvania Insurance Practice, one client stated, “What distinguishes White and Williams is the high level of service and accountability. The team is responsive, organized and reliable, which allows our internal teams to move quickly and make informed decisions with confidence.” Insurer's Attempt to Strike Experts in Collapse Case Fails

    Lawmakers Vote to Reauthorize Programs to Support Water Quality, Coastal Protection

    Circuit Court Lacks Ap
    Novation Agreements Under Federal Contracts

    Handshake Deals Gone Wrong

    Union Handbilling: When, Where, and Why it is Legal

    New York Court Holds Radioactive Materials Exclusion Precludes E&O Coverage for Negligent Phase I Report

    $48 Million Award and Successful Defense of $135 Million Claim

    The Insurance Coverage Debate on Construction Defects Continues

    Dot I’s and Cross T’s When It Comes to Construction Licensure Requirements

    Roof Mounted Solar Panels: Lower Your Risk of Fire

    California Rejects Judgments By Confession Pursuant to Civil Code Section 1132

    Can Your Small Business Afford to Risk the Imminent Threat of a Cyber Incident?

    Admissibility of Expert Opinions in Insurance Bad Faith Trials

    Colorado House Bill 20-1290 – Restriction on the Use of Failure to Cooperate Defense in First-Party Claims

    Be Wary of Construction Defects when Joining a Community Association

    Construction Warranties and the Statute of Repose – Southern States Chemical, Inc v. Tampa Tank & Welding Inc.

    Pay-If-Paid: What You Need to Know Before Signing on the Dotted Line

    Issue and Claim Preclusion When Forced to Litigate Similar Issues in Different Forums: White River Village, LLP v. Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland

    Were Quake Standards Illegally Altered for PG&E Nuclear Power Plant?

    Construction Defect Bill Removed from Committee Calendar

    New York State Trial Court: Non-Cumulation Provision in Excess Policies Mandates “All Sums” Allocation

    Risk Spotter Searches Internal Data Lakes For Loaded Words

    Buy America/Buy American, a Primer For Contractors

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

    Nomos LLP Partner Garret Murai Recognized by Best Lawyers®

    Thinking About a Daubert Motion to Challenge an Expert Opinion?

    Retrofitting Buildings Is the Unsexy Climate Fix the World Needs

    Doctrine of Superior Knowledge in Government Contracting

    California’s SB 61: New Limits on Retention Payments in Private Construction Contracts

    Big Waves and High Tides Can Be Just as Insidious as Hurricanes

    Contractor’s Assignment of Construction Contract to Newly Formed Company Before Company Was Licensed, Not Subject to B&P 7031

    Treasure Island Sues Beach Trail Designer over Concrete Defects

    Updates to the CEQA Guidelines Have Been Finalized

    New Orleans Terror Attack Lawsuit Targets Engineer Mott MacDonald, Contractor and City

    Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC recognized by Construction Executive in The Top 50 Construction Law Firms™ of 2025

    Agile Project Management in the Construction Industry

    How Helsinki Airport Uses BIM to Create the Best Customer Experience

    AEM Pursuing ISO Standard for Earthmoving Grade-Control Data

    Look Out! Texas Building Shedding Marble Panels

    Timely Filed, Wrongly Rejected: Court of Appeal Reinforces Summary Judgment Rights

    Additional Insured Is Covered Under On-Going Operations Endorsement Despite Subcontractor's Completion of Work

    Protect Projects From Higher Repair Costs and Property Damage

    Court of Appeals Discusses the Difference Between “Claims-Made” and “Occurrence-Based” Insurance Policies

    Florida Chinese drywall, pollution exclusion, “your work” exclusion, and “sistership” exclusion.

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment Based Upon Vandalism Exclusion

    Five Pointers for Enforcing a Non-Compete Agreement in Texas

    Mind The Appeal Or: A Lesson From Auto-Owners Insurance Co. V. Bolt Factory Lofts Owners Association, Inc. On Timing Insurance Bad Faith And Declaratory Judgment Insurance Claims Following A Nunn-Agreement

    Haight Celebrates 2024 New Partner Promotions!

    “Bee” Careful: Unique Considerations When Negotiating a Bee Storage Lease Agreement

    Insurer Beware: Failure to Defend Ends with Hefty Verdict

    No Coverage For Damage Caused by Chinese Drywall

    Professional Services Exclusion Bars Coverage After Carbon Monoxide Leak