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

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


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Lawrence County Chapter
    Local # 1535
    201 Main Street c/o Hoosier Door
    Oolitic, IN 47451


    Dearborn Co Home Builders Association
    Local # 1522
    PO Box 21
    Aurora, IN 47001


    Monroe County Building Association
    Local # 1508
    3901 E Hagan St Ste H
    Bloomington, IN 47401
    http://www.mcbaindiana.org

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


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


    Jackson-Jennings Builders Association
    Local # 1574
    11990 W Mt Healthy Rd
    Columbus, IN 47201
    http://www.jjba.org

    Southeastern Indiana chapter
    Local # 1536
    394 W County Road 400 N
    Greensburg, IN 47240



    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Ohio County Indiana

    Construction Contractor “Mean Tweets” Edition

    What’s the Best Way to “Use” a Construction Attorney?

    Developer Africa Israel Wins a Round in New York Condominium Battle

    Property Damage to Insured's Own Work is Not Covered

    US Civil Rights Tools Are Failing the Most Polluted Black Communities

    Construction Defects in Roof May Close School

    In Hong Kong, You Can Find a Home Where the Buffalo Roam

    Navigating Complex Preliminary Notice Requirements

    New York City Dept. of Buildings Explores Drones for Facade Inspections

    ASBCA Validates New Type of Claim Related to Unfavorable CPARS Review [i]

    CSLB Joint Venture Licenses – Providing Contractors With The Means To Expand Their Businesses

    Asbestos Client Alert: Court’s Exclusive Gatekeeper Role May not be Ignored or Shifted to a Jury

    The Potential (Second) Death of Project Labor Agreements

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected to the 2020 Southern California Super Lawyers List

    Architectural Firm, Fired by School District, Launches Lawsuit

    Fixing the Problem – Not the Blame

    Fluor Agrees to $14.5M Fixed-Price Project Cost Pact with SEC

    Planes, Trains and Prevailing Wages. Ok, No Planes, But Trains and Prevailing Wages Yes

    Musk Says ‘Chicago Express’ Tunnel Project Could Start Work in Months

    Rent Increases During the Coronavirus Emergency Part II: Avoiding Violations Under California’s Anti-Price Gouging Statute

    GRSM Attorneys Named Finalists in 2026 Women, Influence & Power in Law Awards

    Update Regarding McMillin Albany LLC v. Super Ct.

    Why Being Climate ‘Positive’ Is the Buzzy New Goal of Green Building

    Las Vegas HOA Conspiracy & Fraud Case Delayed Again

    2026 Construction Outlook: Dampening Outlook With Some Potential Bright Spots

    Hake Law Attorneys Join National Law Firm Wilson Elser

    No Coverage Under Exclusions For Wind and Water Damage

    Mendocino Hospital Nearing Completion

    Toll Brothers Named #1 Home Builder on Fortune Magazine's 2023 World's Most Admired Companies® List

    John Boyden, Alison Kertis Named “Top Rank Attorneys” by Nevada Business Magazine

    One Nation, Under Renovation

    Contractors’ Right to Sue in Washington Requires Registration

    Construction Firm Sues City and Engineers over Reservoir Project

    Can Anyone Save Gary, Indiana?

    US Appeals Court Halts OSHA Vaccine Mandate, Unclear How Long

    NYC-N.J. Gateway Rail-Tunnel Work May Start in 2023

    KF-103 v. American Family Mutual Insurance: An Exception to the Four Corners Rule

    Decision from Hawaii Supreme Court Amplifies Reasoning for its Prior Order in Maui Fire Cases

    Bill Introduced to give Colorado Shortest Statute of Repose in U.S.

    Florida’s Statute of Limitations / Repose for Actions Founded on Construction Improvement Modified

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s 2023 Super Lawyers Rising Stars!

    IoT: Take Guessing Out of the Concrete Drying Process

    Construction Law Client Advisory: What The Recent Beacon Decision Means For Developers And General Contractors

    Vermont Supreme Court Reverses, Finding No Coverage for Collapse

    Houston Home Sales Fall for the First Time in Six Months

    New Jersey Courts Speed Up Sandy Litigation

    Conflicting Exclusions Result in Duty to Defend

    Pending Sales of U.S. Existing Homes Rise Most in Four Years

    Strategic Communication Considerations for Contractors Regarding COVID-19

    Mortgage Battle Flares as U.K. Homebuying Loses Allure
    Corporate Profile

    OHIO COUNTY INDIANA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Through more than four thousand construction, architectural, and engineering related expert designations, the Ohio County, Indiana Construction Expert Directory delivers a streamlined multi-disciplinary expert retention and support solution to construction claims professionals concerned with construction defect and claims litigation. BHA provides construction claims evaluation and expert support services to the industry's leading construction practice groups, Fortune 500 builders, real estate investment trusts, risk managers, owners, as well as a variety of municipalities and government offices. Employing in house resources which comprise testifying architects, design engineers, construction cost and standard of care experts, licensed general and specialty contractors, the organization brings national experience and local capabilities to Ohio County and the surrounding areas.

    Ohio County Indiana construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessOhio County Indiana construction forensic expert witnessOhio County Indiana engineering consultantOhio County Indiana building code compliance expert witnessOhio County Indiana expert witnesses fenestrationOhio County Indiana forensic architectOhio County Indiana consulting architect expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Ohio County, Indiana

    Snell & Wilmer Recognized With Top Honor in Ranking Arizona: Top Law Firms for 2026

    June 22, 2026 —
    PHOENIX – Snell & Wilmer is pleased to announce that the firm has been voted as the top law firm in Arizona for the 17th consecutive year in the 2026 edition of AZ Big Media’s Ranking Arizona: The Best of Arizona Business. The firm was again recognized in the category of “Top 10 large law firms in Arizona” which looked at firms with 39 attorneys or more. “We are honored to receive this award recognizing our team’s ongoing commitment to excellence in service of our clients, our community, and each other,” said Firm Chair Barbara J. Dawson. “We are proud to play a meaningful role in supporting the strength and growth of Arizona’s vibrant business environment amid a rapidly changing global economy.” Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Snell & Wilmer

    Document Everything! Always! No Exceptions! (AKA, Help Your Lawyer Help You!)

    April 14, 2026 —
    I had a case last year in which once again I found myself thinking: if only my client had better documented the verbal agreements, we would have had a much easier time defending his work. I know this is often easier said than done— you are in the middle of building a project, and you get a call, and you need to keep the project moving. No time for written change directives or a special bulletin. And yet—it is simply amazing to me the number of people who develop “litigation amnesia” about things when a lawsuit is involved. Your documentation system does not need to be perfect. You can use a simple Field notebook and handwritten notations. A text memo to yourself or, better yet, an email confirmation to the owner/contractor/whoever. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett PLLC
    Ms. Brumback may be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com

    Denis Serkin and Michael S. Zicherman Co-Edit/Author Lexology Panoramic: Construction 2027

    August 03, 2026 —
    P&A partners Denis Serkin and Michael S. Zicherman served as co-editors and authors of Lexology’s Panoramic: Construction 2027 – US and Global guide. Formerly Getting the Deal Through, Lexology Panoramic provides members of the construction industry and construction-related legal and business providers with side-by-side comparison of key industry issues in 19 jurisdictions worldwide. Reprinted courtesy of Denis Serkin, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Michael S. Zicherman, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Serkin may be contacted at dserkin@pecklaw.com Mr. Zicherman may be contacted at mzicherman@pecklaw.com Read the full story...

    $356 Million Judgement Against Developer for Defective Construction of DC Condominium

    August 16, 2026 —
    On July 31, 2026, the Superior Court of the District of Columbia entered a $356,085,513.00 judgment against developers JBG Smith for defective construction and renovation of the Wardman Tower Residential Condominium in Washington, D.C. The case is Wardman Tower Residential Condominium Unit Owners Association v. JBG Smith Properties, et al., No. 2020 CA 004807 B (D.C. Super. Ct.). In a 148-page Trial Order, the D.C. Superior Court awarded $118,695,171.00 in damages in favor of the condominium association and against the condominium developers, including JBG Smith. The Court trebled those damages pursuant to the District of Columbia Consumer Protection Procedures Act (“CPPA”) to reach an ultimate judgment of $356,085,513.00. See Cowie Law Group: DC Condominium Construction Defects: Recovering Attorney’s Fees, Litigation Expenses & Treble Damages Under the Consumer Protection Procedures Act. Cowie Law Group, P.C. filed the lawsuit on behalf of the Association in 2020. The firm represented the Association throughout years of pretrial discovery and ultimately served as trial counsel with Williams & Connolly LLP during a lengthy bench trial before the Honorable Yvonne Williams. The Cowie Law Group team included attorneys, George A. Bealefeld, III, Albert G. McCarraher, Stanford L. Kimmel, III and Nicholas D. Cowie. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nicholas D. Cowie, Cowie Law Group
    Mr. Cowie may be contacted at ndc@cowielawgroup.com

    Federal Bid Protest Standard of Review and Disparate Treatment with Ratings

    August 16, 2026 —
    A recent decision out of the Federal Claims Court explains the post-award bid protest standard of review. In Massman Construction Co. v. U.S., 2026 WL 1971985 (Fed.Cl. 2026), a protestor brought a post-award bid protest after the Army Corps of Engineers awarded the contract to another contractor. The protestor argued that the Army Corps (government) acted irrational in its evaluation through disparate treatment. The Court of Federal Claims agreed and remanded for the Army Corps to “either justify this disparity or explain why [awardee’s] lower-priced, but technically inferior proposal provides the best value to the government.” Massman Construction, supra at *1. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Arizona Court of Appeals Clarifies Homeowners Association Open Meeting Requirements

    June 29, 2026 —
    A Z N H Revocable Trust v. Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association, No. 1 CA-CV 25-0424 (Ariz. Ct. App. Apr. 28, 2026) OVERVIEW The Arizona Court of Appeals issued an opinion clarifying how homeowners associations must conduct meetings under A.R.S. § 33-1804. The decision reinforces the legislative policy favoring transparency in association governance, bringing association meeting requirements more in line with the open meeting standards applicable to public bodies under A.R.S. § 38-431 et seq. (Arizona’s Open Meeting Law). KEY HOLDINGS 1. All Voting and Formal Actions Must Occur in Open Meetings The Court affirmed that association boards cannot vote or take formal action during closed (executive) sessions. Under A.R.S. § 33-1804(A), associations may close portions of meetings only for “consideration” of certain enumerated topics, such as legal advice, pending litigation, or personal/financial information about individual members. The Court interpreted “consideration” to mean discussion and deliberation, not voting. The Court noted that dictionaries define “consider” as “spending time thinking about a possibility” and “formulating an opinion,” which are processes that precede formal action. This interpretation mirrors how Arizona’s Open Meeting Law (A.R.S. § 38-431.03(D)) prohibits public bodies from voting in executive session. Reprinted courtesy of Jill Casson Owen, Snell & Wilmer, Benjamin J. Hawkins, Snell & Wilmer and Stephen Wright, Snell & Wilmer Ms. Owen may be contacted at jowen@swlaw.com Mr. Hawkins may be contacted at bhawkins@swlaw.com Mr. Wright may be contacted at swright@swlaw.com Read the full story...

    For Urban Walkers, a Patchy Dilemma: Who Owns the Sidewalk?

    July 06, 2026 —
    In 2007, New York City’s sanitation department threatened Natalie Shea with a $300 fine for defacing public property with graffiti. Her crime: drawing a blue flower in front of her family’s Park Slope home with sidewalk chalk. She was six years old. The incident, which made local and national news at the time, captures the fraught role that sidewalks often play in US cities. These patches of pavement do more than carry pedestrians to their destinations: They’re also places for commerce, social interaction and childhood play, from chalking to learning how to ride a bike. Urbanist Jane Jacobs once likened the range of activities that city sidewalks attract to an “intricate ballet.” In the new book Sidewalk Nation: The Life and Law of America’s Most Overlooked Resource (Harvard University Press), author Michael Pollack explores the “tangled web of state and local regulation” that governs sidewalks, with cities often passing along responsibilities for tasks like clearing snow and keeping walkways safe. He paints a portrait of the American sidewalk a disorderly and often neglected network, filled with literal and metaphorical cracks that give rise to all sorts of conflict, from mundane clashes over maintenance to more consequential fights over accessibility and inequality. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Linda Poon, Bloomberg

    Owner Taking Assignment of General Contractor’s Claims Against a Subcontractor(s)

    September 21, 2026 —
    Here’s a scenario that occurs in construction defect cases. An owner sues a general contractor and subs for construction defects. The owner settles with a number of parties and takes an assignment of the general contractor’s claims against some or all of the subs and pursues the remaining parties for indemnity based on the assignment of the general contractor’s claims. This was the scenario in Craftsman Plastering and Lath, Inc. v. Rath Mor, LLC, 2026 WL 2328032 (Fla. 4th DCA 2026). The owner settled with the general contractor and all subs except one. The owner took an assignment of the general contractor’s claim against the sub, and really the indemnity claim. The owner was then substituted as the real party in interest as it relates to the general contractor’s claims against the sub. The owner sought roughly $780,000 in attorney’s fees and costs in connection with the dispute claiming the sub was liable for such fees. The jury didn’t buy the argument and awarded the owner about $55,000. Basically, the jury seemingly prorated the fees by the number of parties, at least, that’s how the math worked out. The owner didn’t like that and moved for an additur to increase the jury’s verdict which the trial court granted. This was reversed on appeal despite the fact that a trial court has broad discretion to grant a motion for additur. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com