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

    Georgia Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: SB 563 stipulates that prior to filing a claim, a homeowner must give the contractor 30 day written notice detailing the nature of the defect. In response, contractor must provide (within 30 days of receipt) a written reply containing an offer of settlement, requirement of inspection or rejection. The law provides definitions relating to construction; offers immunity from liability for certain conditions; and sets up an alternative dispute resolution process.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Paulding County Georgia

    No state license for general contracting required. License is required for Air Conditioning, Electrical, and Plumbing trades.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Paulding Co Builders Association
    Local # 1179
    PO Box 921
    Dallas, GA 30132
    http://www.pauldingcountyhomes.com

    Barrow Co Builders Association
    Local # 1140
    PO Box 959
    Winder, GA 30680
    http://www.barrowcountybuilders.org

    Athens Area Home Builders Association
    Local # 1116
    PO Box 1903
    Athens, GA 30603
    http://www.aahba.com

    Jackson County Builders Association
    Local # 1165
    PO Box 189
    Jefferson, GA 30549
    http://www.jacksoncountybuilders.com

    Greater Atlanta Home Builders Association
    Local # 1124
    1484 Brockett Road
    Tucker, GA 30084
    http://www.atlantahomebuilders.com

    Gtr Walton Builders Association
    Local # 1159
    7706 Hampton Place
    Loganville, GA 30052
    http://www.greaterwaltonhba.com

    Westside Home Builders Association
    Local # 1158
    PO Box 1272
    Douglasville, GA 30133
    http://www.westsideHBA.com


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Paulding County Georgia

    NEW DEFECT WARRANTY LAWS – Now Applicable to Condominiums and HOAs transitioning from Developer to Homeowner Control. Is Your Community Aware of its Rights Under the New Laws?

    Home Builder Doesn’t See Long Impact from Hurricane

    White and Williams Announces Lawyer Promotions

    Let’s Get Specific: Rhode Island Court Asserts Jurisdiction Over Out-of-State Manufacturer

    New York Court of Appeals Takes Narrow View of Labor Law Provisions in Recent Cases

    New York: The "Loss Transfer" Opportunity to Recover Otherwise Non-Recoverable First-Party Benefits

    No Coverage For Wind And Flood Damage Suffered From Superstorm Sandy

    NLRB Broadens the Joint Employer Standard

    New York State Trial Court Addresses “Trigger of Coverage” for Asbestos Claims and Other Coverage Issues

    Flint Water Suits Against Engineers Will Go to Trial, Judge Says

    Ensuing Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

    No Duty to Indemnify When Discovery Shows Faulty Workmanship Damages Insured’s Own Work

    New Jersey Law Firm Announces $4 Million Settlement from Construction Site Accident

    Auditor: Prematurely Awarded Contracts Increased Honolulu Rail Cost by $354M

    Eastern District of Pennsylvania Confirms Carrier Owes No Duty to Defend Against Claims for Faulty Workmanship

    Federal District Court Addresses Anti-concurrent Cause Language in Property Policy

    Not If, But When: Newly Enacted Virginia Legislation Bans “Pay-If-Paid” Clauses In Construction Contracts

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Stuck on You”

    Washington Court Tunnels Deeper Into the Discovery Rule

    Saved By The Statute: The Economic Loss Doctrine Does Not Bar Claims Under Pennsylvania’s Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law

    Biden Unveils $2.3 Trillion American Jobs Plan

    BE PROACTIVE: Steps to Preserve and Enhance Your Insurance Rights In Light of the Recent Natural Disasters

    CGL Coverage Dispute Regarding the (J)(6) And (J)(7) Property Damage Exclusions

    Contractor’s Charge Of Improvements To Real Property Not Required For Laborers To Have Lien Rights

    California Team Secures Appellate Victory on Behalf of Celebrity Comedian Kathy Griffin in Dispute with Bel Air Neighbor

    How to Manage the Scope & Costs of eDiscovery: Understanding the Recently Released AAA eDiscovery Best Practices

    Cybersecurity “Flash” Warning for Construction and Manufacturing Businesses

    Can Your Employee File a Personal Injury Claim if They’re Injured at Work?

    Second Circuit Affirms Win for General Contractor on No Damages for Delay Provision

    Ambiguity Kills in Construction Contracting

    Unjust Enrichment Damages Must Be Measurable and Quantifiable

    ACEC Statement on Negotiated Bipartisan Debt Limit Compromise

    What Does It Mean When a House Sells for $50 Million?

    Billion-Dollar Power Lines Finally Inching Ahead to Help US Grids

    California Enacts New Claims Resolution Process for Public Works Projects

    With Vice President's Tie-Breaker, US Senate Approves Far-Reaching Climate Bill

    Duke Energy Appeals N.C. Order to Excavate Nine Coal Ash Pits

    Landlord Duties of Repair and Covenant of Quiet Enjoyment

    Legislative Changes that Impact Construction 2017

    House Panel Subpoenas VA Documents on Colorado Project

    A Contract Is a Contract: Releases and Change Orders / Bilateral Modifications Are Construed as Contracts

    Suit Limitation Provision Upheld

    Lawsuits over Roof Dropped

    Word of the Day: “Contractor”

    Previously Owned U.S. Home Sales Rise to Eight-Month High

    Court Orders City to Pay for Sewer Backups

    Introducing Nomos LLP!

    Liability policy covers negligent construction: GA high court

    July Sees Big Drop in Home Sales

    Builders Arrested after Building Collapses in India
    Corporate Profile

    PAULDING COUNTY GEORGIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from approximately 5000 building and construction related expert designations, the Paulding County, Georgia Construction Expert Directory delivers a wide range of trial support and consulting services to lawyers and construction practice groups seeking effective resolution of construction defect and claims matters. BHA provides construction claims investigation, testimony, and support services to the construction industry's leading builders and developers, legal professionals, and owners, as well as a variety of state and local government agencies. Utilizing in house assets which include construction delay claims experts, registered design professionals, professional engineers, and credentailed construction consultants, the firm brings specialized expertise and local capabilities to the Paulding County region.

    Paulding County Georgia building code compliance expert witnessPaulding County Georgia construction expert witness consultantPaulding County Georgia construction safety expertPaulding County Georgia construction project management expert witnessesPaulding County Georgia construction defect expert witnessPaulding County Georgia structural concrete expertPaulding County Georgia construction expert testimony
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Paulding County, Georgia

    David Samani Joins BHBA Podcast on Mediation Best Practices

    May 05, 2026 —
    Los Angeles Partner David Samani recently joined a Beverly Hills Bar Association (BHBA) podcast titled, “Mediation 360: Preparation from the Defense, Plaintiff, and Mediator Perspectives,” during which he shared his insights on various aspects of the mediation process. Mr. Samani, along with a plaintiff’s attorney and a mediator, presented their thoughts on topics including how to determine whether a case is appropriate for mediation, preparing to mediate a case, communicating with clients, and handling the mediation itself. Mr. Samani explained that early communication with clients is critical so that attorneys may learn what a client’s objectives are and develop an assessment of the case. He described that “from an early stage,” attorneys should determine the cost of litigation and ensure that the client understands “what an aggressive defense might entail.” As the matter progresses, attorneys and clients should “continue the dialogue” regarding costs as well as the strengths and weaknesses of the case, “making sure the client is apprised of the various alternatives that exist.” In addition, Mr. Samani discussed factors to consider when choosing a mediator, noting, “All mediators have their own styles and backgrounds.” He explained that some cases may call for a mediator with specialized knowledge in a particular area such as bankruptcy or securities, while other mediations may benefit from a mediator who understands the realities of private practice. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Kahana Feld Secures Voluntary Discontinuance With Prejudice in High-Exposure Trip-and-Fall Case

    December 22, 2025 —
    Kahana Feld partners Rachael Marvin and Dominic Donato recently achieved a significant victory in Kings County obtaining a voluntary discontinuance with prejudice of a high-exposure trip-and-fall lawsuit just before oral argument on defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff claimed they were injured after tripping on an allegedly worn and cracked exterior stair at the clients’ property. However, through careful investigation and strategic motion practice, our team argued that the accident did not occur on the defendants’ premises, but instead on a nearby MTA subway platform, as identified by eyewitness accounts and plaintiff’s medical records. Additionally, our defense medical expert opined that the plaintiff’s severe leg injuries were inconsistent with the claimed fall location—supporting our position that the alleged incident could not have happened as described. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kahana Feld

    The AVOID Act: A New Timeline for Liability in New York Construction Projects

    February 23, 2026 —
    By April 18, 2026, New York construction litigation will operate on a faster—and far less forgiving—timeline. The Avoiding Vexatious Overuse of Impleading to Delay (the “AVOID Act”), signed into law on December 19, 2025, fundamentally rewrites third‑party practice under CPLR § 1007 by imposing strict deadlines to bring subcontractors, suppliers, and other responsible parties into a case. For owners, developers, general contractors, and their in‑house counsel, this change will shift risk assessment, contract enforcement, and litigation strategy to the very front end of a claim—particularly in New York Labor Law and construction defect cases. What Changed—and Why It Matters to Construction Cases Historically, New York defendants could implead subcontractors and other players well into discovery. The AVOID Act ends that practice. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Meghan Douris, Seyfarth Shaw LLP
    Ms. Douris may be contacted at mdouris@seyfarth.com

    Agent Not Liable for Loss Given Insured’s Vague Instructions for Coverage

    April 08, 2026 —
    The Illinois Appellate Court affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the insured’s agent because there was no breach of duty. Jon Van Order v. Hauk, et al., 2025 Ill. App. Unpub. LEXIS 2378 (Ill. Ct. App. Dec. 23, 2025). The insured began renovating a vacant home in October 2018. He met with agent Joseph Hauk and explained the property was vacant and would be going through renovations for the next several months. Hauk then procured a policy through Shelter Insurance Company insuring the vacant property against several specified perils. The policy provided coverage for water damage if “[t]he exterior of the building sustained a covered loss” and “that loss created an opening through which the water entered.” Damage caused by escaping water from within a plumbing system was excluded if: (1) the damage was caused by a “continuous or repeated leakage over a period of fourteen days or more” or (2) the insured premises had been vacant for 30 consecutive days immediately preceding the loss. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Fort Lauderdale Team Secures Defense Verdict for Client in Premises Liability Lawsuit

    December 30, 2025 —
    Fort Lauderdale, Fla. (October 27, 2025) - Fort Lauderdale Partner Paul Gamm and Associate Amber Dawson recently obtained a complete defense verdict for their client, a grocery store operator, in a premises liability case in Florida state court. The accident in question occurred in December 2022, when two vehicles collided at an uncontrolled internal parking lot intersection at the grocery store property. The plaintiff refused to blame the other driver, a non-party at trial. The plaintiff alleged that the intersection should have been controlled with a stop sign because it lacked the appropriate sight distance for drivers to perceive threats from oncoming traffic. The plaintiff filed suit against the client in the 17th Judicial Circuit Court of Florida. She claimed she suffered cervical and lumbar herniations, requiring one facet lumbar fusion and two outstanding surgeries. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Las Vegas Partner Jeffrey Saab and Team Leader D. Ryan Efros Secure a $0.00 Settlement on a Multimillion-Dollar Construction Defect Case!

    April 14, 2026 —
    Partner Jeffrey Saab and Team Leader D. Ryan Efros’ client was a construction supervisor on a palatial mansion. The homeowners claimed millions of dollars in damages and asserted the client was a general contractor (GC) and so responsible for the alleged defects. Jeff and Ryan took more than 15 depositions, reinforcing their trial strategy theme: that the client was not a GC, but Plaintiffs were. They secured significant concessions from Plaintiffs, pressed Plaintiffs’ own negligent construction choices, and made the risk of trying the case intolerable. On the eve of trial, Plaintiffs backed down, settling out Jeff and Ryan’s client for $0.00. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    U.S. Supreme Court Decision May Negate State Law Requirement to File a Certificate of Merit with the Complaint in a Federal Action Against a Design Professional

    April 27, 2026 —
    To deter frivolous and unfounded claims against design professionals, states throughout the country have enacted statutes which generally require litigants to furnish a formal certification of merit (“COM”) from a qualified expert or face potential dismissal of their lawsuit. These COM statutes can impose a significant front-end burden on claimants who must pay an expert to review project records, interview the project team, and prepare a formal report before the lawsuit can be filed—often regardless of the amount in controversy. However, in light of a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in a medical malpractice case, most, if not all of these statutes, may no longer be enforceable in federal court. This article examines the recent decision in Berk v. Choy, 146 S. Ct. 546 (2026), the decisions thus far which have applied Berk to invalidate COM statutes, and other categories of statutes applicable to the construction industry which may face a similar fate. The U.S. Supreme Court Decision (Berk v. Choy) In Berk, the plaintiff, Harold Berk, sued a doctor for medical malpractice under Delaware law in Delaware federal court. 146 S. Ct. at 551. Under Del. Code, Tit. 18, § 6853(a)(1), an affidavit of merit (like a COM) must accompany a complaint alleging medical malpractice. Id. Berk failed to include an affidavit of merit with his complaint. Id. at 552. Applying Delaware state law, the federal court dismissed Berk’s medical malpractice claim. Berk appealed to the Third Circuit, arguing that the affidavit of merit required by § 6853(a)(1) is unenforceable in federal court because it is more onerous than the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Third Circuit affirmed the District Court’s ruling, finding § 6853(a)(1) enforceable in federal court. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Olsen, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Phillip Boldt, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Olsen may be contacted at colsen@pecklaw.com Mr. Boldt may be contacted at pboldt@pecklaw.com Read the full story...

    Inaccurate Representations Can Lead to Differing Site Conditions Claim

    May 26, 2026 —
    In the prior posting, I discussed a case dealing with a differing site condition. In that case, the owner did not have an affirmative duty to make a representation and there was no inaccurate representation made by the owner that misled the contractor. Well, what about when there is an inaccurate misrepresentation regarding the site? This was the circumstance in an older Florida case where a dredging contractor had a successful differing site conditions claim. See Jacksonville Port Authority v. Parkhill-Goodloe, Co., Inc., 362 So.2d 1009 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). The government provided inaccurate information as to the lack of rock that would be encountered during the dredging that was relied on by the dredging contractor. But the government had “superior knowledge” that there was rock in an adjacent location based on a prior claim from a contractor, yet the government did not disclose the possibility that rock could be encountered. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com