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

    Minnesota Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Statutory warranties for one-year, two-year and ten-year periods limits types of construction defects actionable under warranty law; This statute (Chapter 327A) limits liability and excludes normal wear and tear, normal shrinkage caused by drying of the dwelling, loss due to insufficient ventilation, loss or damage from negligence, improper maintenance, or alteration to dwelling, loss or damage from failure to maintain or failure to mitigate


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Sauk Centre Minnesota

    Residential contractors need to be licensed. If you work in two or more trades, certain trades will require a license. Call the state for details.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Vikingland Builders Assoc
    Local # 2495
    509 22ND AVE E Ste 200
    Alexandria, MN 56308
    http://www.vikinglandbuilders.com

    Central Minnesota Builders Association
    Local # 2410
    1124 W Saint Germain St
    Saint Cloud, MN 56301
    http://www.cmbaonline.org

    West Central Builders Assoc
    Local # 2432
    PO Box 447
    New London, MN 56273
    http://www.westcentralbuilders.com

    Home Builders Association of Mid-Minnesota
    Local # 2450
    17068 Commercial Park Road
    Brainerd, MN 56401
    http://www.midmnba.org

    Builders Association of the Twin Cities
    Local # 2433
    2960 Centre Pointe Drive
    Roseville, MN 55113
    http://www.batconline.org

    Builders Association of Minnesota
    Local # 2400
    525 Park St Ste 150
    Saint Paul, MN 55103
    http://www.bamn.org

    Crow River Builders Association Affil w/National Associated Home Builders
    Local # 2424
    PO Box 656
    Hutchinson, MN 55350
    http://www.crbahome.org


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Sauk Centre Minnesota

    You Are on Notice: Failure to Comply With Contractual Notice Provisions Can Be Fatal to Your Claim

    JD Supra’s 2017 Reader’s Choice Awards

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Ursinus is Cleared!”

    Contractor Covered for Voluntary Remediation Efforts in Completed Homes

    California Appellate Court Rules That Mistakenly Grading the Wrong Land Is Not an Accident

    Will Future Megacities Be a Marvel or a Mess? Look at New Delhi

    How Concrete Mistakes Added Cost to the Recent Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge Project

    Contractors Can No Longer Make Roof Repairs Following Their Own Inspections

    Beyond the Storm: How Non-Hurricane Catastrophes Expose Florida’s Construction Defect Blind Spot

    Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series, Part 2: Coverage for Smoke-Related Damages

    Court Retained Jurisdiction to Enforce Settlement Under Code of Civil Procedure Section 664.6 Despite Dismissal of Complaint

    Court of Appeals Upholds Default Judgment: Serves as Reminder to Respond to Lawsuits in a Timely Manner

    Traub Lieberman Partner Eric D. Suben Obtains Federal Second Circuit Affirmance of Summary Judgment in Insurer’s Favor

    Vallagio v. Metropolitan Homes: Colorado Supreme Court Upholds Declarant Consent Provision to Amend Arbitration Out of Declarations

    AI – A Designer’s Assistant or a Replacement?

    Federal Court Asks South Dakota Supreme Court to Decide Whether Injunction Costs Are “Damages,” Adopts Restatement’s Position on Providing “Inadequate” Defense

    Construction Litigation—Battles on Many Fronts

    A Lesson from the Criminal Courtroom to Construction Contractors About Videos and Photos

    Is Your Contract “Mission Essential?” Recovering Costs for Performing During a Force Majeure Event Under Federal Regulations

    Protect Projects From Higher Repair Costs and Property Damage

    Contractors and Force Majeure: Contractual Protection from Hurricanes and Severe Weather

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (06/06/23) – Housing Woes, EV Plants and the Debate over Public Financing

    Arizona Contractor Designs Water-Repellant Cabinets

    Colorado Appeals Court Clarifies “Control” Exception to Statute of Repose

    Beware: Hyper-Technical Labor Code Violations May Expose Employers to Significant Claims for Penalties under the Labor Code California Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA)

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Eliminates Loss from Hurricane

    Unpaid Subcontractor Walks Off the Job and Wins

    Finding of No Coverage Overturned Due to Lack of Actual Policy

    Massachusetts Pulls Phased Trigger On Its Statute of Repose

    CDJ’s #8 Topic of the Year: California’s Board of Equalization Tower

    A DC Office Building Offers a Lesson in Glass and Sculpture

    The Court-Side Seat: FERC Reviews, Panda Power Plaints and Sovereign Immunity

    Subcontractor's Faulty Workmanship Is Not an "Occurrence"

    When it Comes to Trials, it’s Like a Box of Chocolates. Sometimes You Get the Icky Cream Filled One

    The Road to Hell is Paved with Good Intentions: A.B. 1701’s Requirement that General Contractors Pay Subcontractor Employee Wages Will Do More Harm Than Good

    Case Remanded for Application of Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    Ninth Circuit Holds Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine Applies Beyond All-Risk Policies

    OSHA COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing ETS Unveiled

    GRSM Women Attorneys Named Finalists in Three Categories at 2025 Women, Influence & Power in Law Awards

    Blockbuster Breakwater: Alternative Construction Method Put to the Test in Tampa Bay

    White and Williams LLP Secures a Clean Sweep Dismissal of Architect's Professional Liability Coverage Lawsuit

    Index Demonstrates Increase in Builders’ Sentiment

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in 2021 Best Lawyers in America and Best Lawyers: Ones To Watch!

    Finding an "Occurrence," Appellate Court Rules Insurer Must Defend

    Arizona Rooftop Safety: Is it Adequate or Substandard?

    Limitation on Coverage for Payment of Damages Creates Ambiguity

    NLRB Broadens the Joint Employer Standard

    Occurrence-Based Insurance Policies and Claims-Made Insurance Policies – There’s a Crucial Difference

    Chambers USA Names Peckar & Abramson to Band 1 Level in Construction Law; 29 P&A Lawyers Recognized as Leading Attorneys; Six Regions and Government Contracts Practice Recognized

    DEP Plan to Deal with Noxious Landfill Fumes Met with Criticism
    Corporate Profile

    SAUK CENTRE MINNESOTA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    With over 4500 construction claims related expert witness designations, the Sauk Centre, Minnesota Construction Expert Directory provides a streamlined multi-disciplinary expert retention and support solution to lawyers and construction practice groups concerned with construction defect and claims litigation. BHA provides construction 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. In connection with in house assets comprising design experts, civil / structural engineers, ICC Certified Inspectors, ASPE certified professional estimators, the firm brings national experience and local capabilities to Sauk Centre and the surrounding areas.

    Sauk Centre Minnesota construction project management expert witnessesSauk Centre Minnesota construction defect expert witnessSauk Centre Minnesota hospital construction expert witnessSauk Centre Minnesota multi family design expert witnessSauk Centre Minnesota expert witness commercial buildingsSauk Centre Minnesota construction defect expert witnessSauk Centre Minnesota stucco expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Sauk Centre, Minnesota

    Four Families Now Live in the Season Six Rock the Block Homes in Grantsville, Utah

    April 20, 2026 —
    SALT LAKE CITY, April 20, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- The premier of Rock the Block season seven aired last Monday and is set in Las Vegas, Nevada. Rock The Block is HGTV's highest rated show. Last year, season six was set in Utah and had HGTV's highest rating yet, with over 14 million viewers. All episodes of season six were filmed in the Worthington Ranch community in Grantsville, Utah. The four homes on the show were built by Utah builder Hamlet Homes. During the show, the location of the four Rock The Block homes had to be kept secret and were surrounded by a locked gate. After over a year of being inaccessible, the Utah public was invited in May 2025 to tour the homes and help raise money together for charity. On May 30-31, 2025, Hamlet hosted a 'Rock The Block Party' where the public was able to walk through the homes made famous by the show. Hamlet Owner, VP of Marketing & Design Tami Ostmark shares stories from the show and her perspective of what it's like to be the builder on a national show like this. Ostmark was on set almost the entire time. "As expected, there were times when there was tension on the set. All four designers were super competitive with each other. It's amazing that the production team was able to produce the show as well as they did. I'm very impressed," said Ostmark. Another interesting point related to the show is how much work the local builder is responsible for. Some nights as many as 30 Hamlet team members worked through the night to keep up with the pace of production. "Each designer provided their own trusted carpenters to do finishing work. In two of the cases, designers' flew their favorite carpenters in to carry out their visions. Given the quick turnaround, it's not always practical for finishing work to be permanent. Sometimes, it just needs to look appealing on camera," said Ostmark. This is frequently referred to as 'TV Magic'. "When the show was over, Hamlet re-did any areas that required extra attention". The show really does shoot in only 7 weeks as depicted. This creates a fast pace that was very exciting to be a part of", continued Ostmark. All four of the homes featured on the show have since been purchased; four Utah families currently call them home. ABOUT HAMLET HOMES Hamlet Homes (www.hamlethomes.com) crafts quality customer-oriented townhomes and single-family homes located in attractively designed communities in Utah and Idaho. Since the company's founding in 1995, Hamlet has built over 5,000 homes in 80 communities. The company is a proud recipient of many awards on Sustainable Business & Design, Quality Builder Awards; recognized both locally and nationally. Named by the Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce as the 'Veteran Owned Small Business of the Year, in 2019'. Hamlet has since been named several times to the Professional Builder's Housing Giants List and annual HOME AWARDS Best Customer Experience. Most recently in 2026, Hamlet was named Utah's 'Best of State for Real Estate Development and Utah Businesses 'Best Companies to Work For' for the 6th consecutive year.

    “The Superintendent Told Us to Do It:” Why Verbal Approval May Not Be Enough

    June 02, 2026 —
    In construction defect litigation, one scenario appears repeatedly: a subcontractor installs work in a manner that differs from the plans, specifications, manufacturer instructions, or industry standards after being verbally directed to do so by the general contractor, superintendent, architect, or owner’s representative. At the time, the decision may seem minor. The project is moving quickly, the field team wants to maintain progress, and nobody wants to stop working over what appears to be a small issue. The subcontractor may trust the superintendent or project manager and assume the conversation will be remembered later if questions arise. Years later, however, when the project experiences problems, the people involved may deny the conversation occurred, remember it differently, or simply no longer remember the project. Without written documentation, the subcontractor can find itself defending claims for defective work, even though it performed the installation exactly as directed. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Andrew Lintner, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. Lintner may be contacted at alintner@hhmrlaw.com

    Insured Does Not Prevail on Summary Judgment Motion Invoking Ensuing Loss Provision

    May 05, 2026 —
    The court denied the insured’s motion for summary judgment finding genuine issues of fact regarding implication of the policy’s ensuing loss provision. Stella Prop. Dev.. & Event Productions, LLC v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15854 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 28, 2026). Stella owned a cultural center that was insured under a commercial property all-risk policy issued by Auto-Owners. A windstorm with gusts of 65 miles per hour struck the Center causing damage. The Center’s inspector found extensive wind damage on nearly all facets of the roof. Further, the inspector found the existing organic shingles were in “very poor condition” and were “defective, discontinued, and no longer available.” The estimated cost of repairs to the roof was $108,010.52. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

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

    April 20, 2026 —
    The U.S. House of Representatives has passed a package of 14 bills that includes measures to reauthorize several U.S. Environmental Protection Agency programs to protect and restore critical water ecosystems, expand access to broadband, reduce regulatory requirements on airport projects and programs and lower costs of federal buildings. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pam McFarland, Engineering News-Record
    Ms. McFarland may be contacted at mcfarlandp@enr.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

    Insurer Granted Summary Judgment on Claim for Roof Damage Caused by Windstorm

    May 26, 2026 —
    The insurer successfully moved for summary judgment, eliminating the insured’s claim for roof damage due to windstorm. Mulas v. Westchester Surplus Lines Ins. Co., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20537 (Jan. 30, 2026). The insureds’ commercial property sustained windstorm damage during Hurricane Ian. Westchester denied the claim. The insureds believed Westchester wrongfully denied coverage for roof damage and various interior damage to property. The insureds also argued that Westchester’s actual cash value (ACV) payment did not reflect the fully insured loss. The insureds sued and Westchester moved for summary judgment. Westchester argued the roof damage was not covered because Hurricane Ian did not cause the damage. Westchester hired an engineer who determined the roof damage was not caused by wind from Hurricane Ian. Westchester pointed out that the insureds’ expert also found no wind damage on the roof. The insureds offered no other evidence suggesting the hurricane caused roof damage. Therefore, the insureds could not show that Westchester breached the policy by denying coverage. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Predict Risk, Not Incidents: A New Analytics Framework for Your Construction Safety Data

    August 03, 2026 —
    Behind every “zero-incidents” company report, hidden hazards may already be accumulating—risks that could become serious injuries tomorrow. The question every executive should be asking is not, “Did anything go wrong last month?” It is: “Where is risk building on my projects right now?” Most construction organizations cannot answer that question. Not because the data does not exist—it does. Every active project generates daily inspection findings, labor records, near-miss reports and audit results. The problem is that standard safety systems collect this data and then report it in ways that make it operationally useless for prevention. They describe the past. They predict nothing. The predictive safety analytics framework (PSAF) is a practical, deployable system developed from years of applying data science to large-scale construction portfolio operations that takes the safety data construction organizations already collect and transforms it into a forward-looking risk signal. The result? A single weekly score that tells executives where risk is concentrating across their portfolio before anyone gets hurt. Reprinted courtesy of Tabrez Zahoor, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

    Sometimes a General Damages Assessment is Enough. . .

    July 06, 2026 —
    It has been a while since I last posted here at Construction Law Musings. Life, law practice, and “blogger’s block” have taken their toll on the posting schedule. Hopefully this will be one of several upcoming posts now that the litigation schedule has lightened a bit over the summer. Today’s post is about damages. Specifically damage to a homeowner’s roof and her legal damages therefor. That last is of course a sentence that only a construction attorney (or other litigator) could possibly craft and have it make sense. Now, on with the case. . .In Hardesty Construction, Inc. v. Weedon, the facts are as follows: Ms. Weedon had hail damage to the roof of her home. She hired Hardesty Construction to repair and replace the roof. After the first roof was installed and failed inspection, a second roof was installed. The issue was that the first roof had a warranty and the second roof, installed similarly to the first (and allegedly with the same construction issues according to Ms. Weedon’s expert), was not provided with the promised warranty. As one may expect, Weedon sued Hardesty and Hardesty Construction for fraudulent inducement and breach of contract. At trial, Weedon testified, without objection, that her home was worth $40,000 less because of Hardesty Construction’s work, which was based partially on quotes Weedon received to fix the roof. The Circuit Court granted Hardesty Construction’s motion to strike Weedon’s fraudulent inducement claim, but not her other claims. A jury awarded Weedon $30,253.30 on her breach of contract claim. Hardesty Construction appealed, arguing the Circuit Court erred in (a) allowing the jury to consider Weedon’s valuation testimony because it was not based on her personal knowledge and (b) denying its motion to strike based on insufficient evidence as to damages. Weedon assigned cross-error in the Circuit Court’s decision to grant the motion to strike her fraudulent inducement claim against Samual Hardesty. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com