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

    Indiana Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: According to SB45160, §IC 32-27-3-1&2 a claimant must provide written notice 60 days before filing an action. Within 21 days after service of the notice, the construction professional must serve a written response. Claimant must file list of known construction defects, description, and the construction professional responsible for each alleged defect (to the extent known).


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Mackey Indiana

    License required for plumbing. All other licensing is done at the local county level.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Home Builders Association of Southern Indiana
    Local # 1566
    1601 Greentree Court
    Clarksville, IN 47129
    http://www.hbasi.net

    Gibson Co Chapter
    Local # 1530
    PO Box 386
    Princeton, IN 47670


    Builders Association of Dubois County
    Local # 1511
    1813 S A St
    Jasper, IN 47546
    http://www.dcbuilder.org

    Southwestern Indiana Builders
    Local # 1524
    2175 N Cullen Avenue
    Evansville, IN 47715
    http://www.sibaonline.org

    Vincennes Area Chapter
    Local # 1563
    PO Box 531
    Vincennes, IN 47591


    River Valley Chapter of National Associated Home Builders
    Local # 1576
    PO Box 365
    Hanover, IN 47243


    Lawrence County Chapter
    Local # 1535
    201 Main Street c/o Hoosier Door
    Oolitic, IN 47451



    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Mackey Indiana

    Homeowner’s Policy Excludes Coverage for Loss Caused by Chinese Drywall

    California Supreme Court Rules Developers can be Required to Include Affordable Housing

    Sewage Treatment Agency Sues Insurer and Contractor after Wall Failure and Sewage Leak

    Snell & Wilmer Partner Jonathan Frank Named Winner of 2025 Connect CRE’s Lawyers in Real Estate Award

    English v. RKK- There is Even More to the Story

    When Every Drop Matters, Cities Turn to Watertech

    Fall 2024 Legislative Update:

    Improper Classification Under Davis Bacon Can Be Costly

    Judge Dismisses Suit to Block Construction of Obama Center

    Nine Haight Attorneys Selected for Best Lawyers®: Ones to Watch 2021

    Builders Beware: Smart Homes Under Attack by “Hide ‘N Seek” Botnet

    Illinois Court Determines Insurer Must Defend Property Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship

    Deterioration of Bridge Infrastructure Is Increasing Insurance Needs

    Randy Maniloff Recognized by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® as a "Lawyer of the Year"

    Sales Pickup Shows Healing U.S. Real Estate Market

    Washington, DC’s COVID-19 Eviction Moratorium Expires

    Haight Expands California Reach – Opens Office in Sacramento

    The Other Side of the North Dakota Oil Boom: Evictions

    NY Supreme Court Rules City Not Liable for Defective Sidewalk

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (3/20/24) – Construction Backlog Falls, National Association of Realtors Settle Litigation, and Commercial Real Estate Market’s Effect on City Cuts

    New Law, Old Risks: Why Colorado’s H.B. 25-1272 May Backfire on Builders

    Surplus Lines Carrier Can Force Arbitration in Louisiana Despite Statute Limiting Arbitration

    Michigan Claims Engineers’ Errors Prolonged Corrosion

    The Credibility of Your Expert (Including Your Delay Expert) Matters in Construction Disputes

    The Difference Between Routine Document Destruction and Spoliation

    Insurer Springs a Leak in Its Pursuit of Subrogation

    Property Damage to Non-Defective Work Is Covered

    U.K. to Set Out Plan for Fire-Risk Apartment Cladding Crisis

    Floating Crane on Job in NYC's East River Has a Storied Past of Cold War Intrigue

    Six-Month Prison Term for Role in HOA Scam

    Burden Supporting Termination for Default

    Reckless Disregard is. . . Well. . .Reckless

    Call Me Maybe: California’s Fair Claims Settlement Practices Regulations

    Julie Firestone & Francois Ecclesiaste Recognized as 2023 MSBA North Star Lawyers

    Hunton Insurance Recovery Partner Michael Levine Quoted on Why Courts Must Consider the Science of COVID-19

    Berger: FIGG Is Slow To Hand Over All Bridge Collapse Data

    Court Finds That SIR Requirements are Not Incorporated into High Level Excess Policies and That Excess Insurers’ Payment of Defense Costs is Not Conditioned on Actual Liability

    Zetlin & De Chiara Ranked in the Top Tier for Construction Law by Legal 500 USA

    Nevada’s Home Building Industry can Breathe Easier: No Action on SB250 Leaves Current Attorney’s Fees Provision Intact

    Cuba: Construction Boom Potential for U.S. Construction Companies and Equipment Manufacturers?

    Subsidence Exclusion Bars Coverage for Damage Caused by Landslide

    No Alerts Heard in Deadly Texas Flash Flood as 161 Still Missing

    Sustainable, Versatile and Resilient: How Mass Timber Construction Can Shake Up the Building Industry

    No Coverage Where Cracks in Basement Walls Do Not Amount to Sudden Collapse

    Court Holds That Trimming of Neighbor’s Trees is Not an Insured Accident or Occurrence

    Construction Insurance Costs for New York Schools is Going Up

    Is Modular Construction Destined to Fail?

    New Jersey Supreme Court Upholds $400 Million Award for Superstorm Sandy Damages

    Echoes of Shutdown in Delay of Key Building Metric

    Disgruntled Online Reviews of Attorney by Disgruntled Former Client Ordered Removed from Yelp.com
    Corporate Profile

    MACKEY INDIANA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Through more than four thousand construction claims related expert witness designations, the Mackey, Indiana Construction Expert Directory delivers a wide range of trial support and consulting services to construction claims professionals concerned with construction defect, scheduling, and delay claims. BHA provides building related trial support and expert consulting services to the building industry's most recognized companies, Fortune 500 builders, CGL carriers, risk managers, and a variety of municipalities. Employing in house assets which comprise construction standard of care consultants, registered architects, professional engineers, and credentialed building envelope experts, the firm brings specialized expertise and local capabilities to the Mackey region.

    Mackey Indiana construction claims expert witnessMackey Indiana ada design expert witnessMackey Indiana construction expert witness public projectsMackey Indiana stucco expert witnessMackey Indiana consulting architect expert witnessMackey Indiana civil engineering expert witnessMackey Indiana civil engineer expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Mackey, Indiana

    Measure Twice, Cut (the Check) Once: Liability for Cybercrime and How to Avoid It

    December 15, 2025 —
    The well-known maxim among carpenters – “measure twice, cut once” – serves as a prudent reminder in the context of construction progress payments, which have become increasingly vulnerable to cybercriminal activity. Consider the following scenario: a joint venture contractor had been receiving progress payments via wire transfer from the project owner. A cybercriminal infiltrated the contractor’s IT infrastructure, identified a pending invoice, and impersonated an employee to redirect the payment. The hacker initially requested that the funds be sent to a new account in rural New York under the general contractor’s name, rather than to the joint venture’s established Houston account. The owner wisely inquired why it should pay the general contractor and not the joint venture who the owner had paid on the prior twenty-nine progress payments. The hacker quickly corrected its request, submitted a new request that misspelled the joint venture’s name, and specified ACH to a third bank, this time in Florida. Despite these glaring red flags, the owner less wisely wired $460,000 to the hacker’s account. Reprinted courtesy of Curt Martin, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. , Richard Volack, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Quinn Kuriger, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@pecklaw.com Mr. Volack may be contacted at rvolack@pecklaw.com Mr. Kuriger may be contacted at qkuriger@pecklaw.com Read the full story...

    My Current Love-Hate Relationship with AI

    June 08, 2026 —
    It’s early in the relationship, I know. But still, there are some things that bug me. Yet, I also know that it’s a relationship in which leaving is not an option, and even if I could, it’s not to the point where it’s so bad that I would do so. So, if you would, let me gripe a bit. While there’s been much discussion about AI and, at least in my neck of the woods, a fair amount of discussion about how lawyers can, should, and must use AI or risk becoming discarded into the dustbin of history, much less has been written about clients’ use of AI. Increasingly, I’ve gotten the sense that my clients are using AI. For example, I had a client ask for confirmation that if he disagreed with an administrative decision that he could file a writ of mandate, and if so, whether that deadline was 30, 60 or 90 days after the administrative decision. The answer to the first question was yes, and as to the second question, the answer was 90 days. This was from a client who, smart as he is, probably didn’t know this off the top of his head. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret D. Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.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

    Identifying Unfair Clauses in Construction Contracts

    February 17, 2026 —
    In 1979, virtually all projects were completed under form contracts. As I started practicing construction law, it seemed that most form contracts were generally fair. They were negotiated by industry groups and over the next 10-20 years they appeared to become fairer. We could and did compare provisions in the AIA documents, the Federal contract forms, and the EJCDC agreements. When we did, we found subtle differences, but broad similarities in their approach to contract risk allocation. Today many (most?) private projects are done with “manuscript” contracts – instruments tailored to the owner’s interests. And many public entities have developed their own contracts. And not all those clauses seem so fair. This month I focus on contract clauses that I consider unfair. And while unfairness, like beauty, may be in the eye of the beholder, I think that the clauses described below aptly fit that descriptor. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Curtis W. Martin, Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@pecklaw.com

    On Checks and Balances

    March 03, 2026 —
    It’s called “checks and balances” for a reason. And, generally, it works well so long as there are clear boundaries between the “co-equal” branches of government. In Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. Department of Industrial Relations, 108 Cal.App.5th 243 (2025), the 3rd District Court of Appeals upheld a set of regulations issued by the California Apprenticeship Council that contradicted an earlier 2015 ruling of the Court of Appeals. The Associated General Contractors of California Case At issue in the case was California’s Prevailing Wage Law which requires public works contractors to hire a certain ratio of apprentices. The purpose of the apprenticeship requirements is to maintain the pipeline of skilled tradespeople on taxpayer-funded projects. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Microscopic Soot, Major Win: Policyholder Coverage Expands

    January 06, 2026 —
    In a recent opinion, the 8th Circuit rejected an insurer’s attempt to expand insurer victories in a COVID-19 context to other more traditional claims of property damage. Reaffirming long standing principles, the court held soot and water damage associated with a fire constituted “direct physical loss or damage” under a commercial property insurance policy. The policyholder, Maxus Metropolitan, sued their insurer, Travelers, which had refused to reimburse Maxus for remediation costs associated with a fire at their building. The dispute arose after one of six buildings in a complex owned by Maxus caught fire. Travelers covered part of the damage for the building that caught fire. However, seven months after the fire, Maxus learned of soot and water damage throughout the other five buildings, some of which were under construction and some that had residents. The commercial property policy Travelers issued to Maxus covered up to $35 million in “direct physical loss…or damage.” Travelers refused to reimburse for the remediation and in response Maxus sued Travelers for breach of contract and vexatious refusal to pay in Missouri. Reprinted courtesy of Scott P. DeVries, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP and Natalie Reed, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP Mr. DeVries may be contacted at sdevries@hunton.com Ms. Reed may be contacted at nreed@hunton.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

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (3/11/25) – An AI Inflection Point for Hotels, Investor Pivot in Build-to-Rent and Looming Legislation for Single-Family Investors

    March 24, 2026 —
    In our latest roundup, lodging demand for World Cup brings growth, commercial property management firms use of AI becomes firmer, construction industry shows slow start to the year, and more! Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team