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

    Montana Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: SB 389; Code Section 70-19-427 requires homeowners to provide notice of an alleged construction defect before filing a lawsuit. The contractor has the option to offer to inspect the defect, repair the defect, offer a settlement or dispute the claim. After being served with written notice, the contractor has 21 days to respond: offer to inspect the defect, repair the defect, offer a settlement or dispute the claim.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Babb Montana

    Businesses must register with the Secretary of State. No state license is required for general contracting. Licensure is required for plumbing, electrical, and crane operating trades.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Flathead Building Assoc.
    Local # 2790
    21 W Reserve Dr
    Kalispell, MT 59901
    http://www.buildingflathead.com

    Home Builders Association of Great Falls
    Local # 2744
    600 6th St NW Ste 5
    Great Falls, MT 59404


    Missoula Building Industry Association
    Local # 2788
    1840 S Ave W
    Missoula, MT 59801
    http://www.buildmissoula.com

    Helena Building Industry Association
    Local # 2766
    3180 Dredge Dr Ste B
    Helena, MT 59602
    http://www.helenabia.com

    Montana Home Builders Association
    Local # 2700
    1717 11th Ave
    Helena, MT 59601
    http://www.montanabia.com

    Bitterroot Building Industry Association
    Local # 2729
    PO Box 1299
    Hamilton, MT 59840
    http://wwwbbiamontana.org

    Rocky Mountain Chapter
    Local # 2750
    PO Box 154
    Anaconda, MT 59711



    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Babb Montana

    Why You Make A Better Wall Than A Window: Why Policyholders Can Rest Assured That Insurers Should Pay Legal Bills for Claims with Potential Coverage

    Gatluak Ramdiet Named to The National Black Lawyers’ “Top 40 Under 40” List

    NY Project Produces America's First Utility Scale Wind Power

    HOA Group Speaking Out Against Draft of Colorado’s Construction Defects Bill

    Erector Tops Out 850-Foot-Tall Rainier Square Tower in Only 10 Months

    EPA Proposes New WOTUS Definition, Narrowing Clean Water Act Jurisdiction

    Newark Team Obtains Appellate Ruling Affirming Summary Judgment for Lawyer and Firm in Professional Negligence Lawsuit

    Perspectives from Pioneers: Kenneth C. Gibbs

    UK SFO Makes Arrests in European Data Center Bribery Probe

    No Coverage for Sink Hole Loss

    When Licensing Lapses: How One Contractor Lost a $1 Million Dispute

    Wes Payne Receives Defense Attorney of the Year Award

    Insurer Waives Objection to Appraiser's Partiality by Waiting Until Appraisal Issued

    Contract Terms Can Impact the Accrual Date For Florida’s Statute of Repose

    U.K. Construction Unexpectedly Strengthens for a Second Month

    A Chicago Skyscraper Cements the Legacy of a Visionary Postmodern Architect

    Veolia Agrees to $25M Settlement in Flint Water Crisis Case

    The Problem with Bunting with Two Strikes

    No Indemnity Coverage Where Insured Suffers No Loss

    When OSHA Cites You

    Meet Your Future Team Members: AI Agents

    Court Denies Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Collapse Claim

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “A Fastball Right to the Bean!”

    Does the UCC Apply to the Contract for the Sale of Goods and Services

    Insurer's Judgment on the Pleadings Based Upon Expected Injury Exclusion Reversed

    A Few Green Building Notes

    New York Court Rejects Owner’s Bid for Additional Insured Coverage

    #12 CDJ Topic: Am. Home Assur. Co. v. SMG Stone Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75910 (N. D. Cal. June 11, 2015)

    Claim for Punitive Damages Based on Insurers' Alleged Bad Faith Business Practices Fails

    Examining Best Practices for Fire Protection of Critical Systems in Buildings

    A Brief Primer on Perfecting Your Mechanics Lien When the Property Owner Files Bankruptcy

    Court Rejects Efforts to Limit Scope of Judgment Creditor’s Direct Action Under Insurance Code Section 11580

    New York Court Finds No Coverage Owed for Asbestos Losses Because Insured Failed to Prove Material Terms

    What the FIU Bridge Collapse Says About Peer Review

    Let it Shine: California Mandates Rooftop Solar for New Residential Construction

    Carbon Monoxide Injuries Caused by One Occurrence

    Punchlist: The News We Didn’t Quite Get To – May 2016

    Infrared Photography Illuminates Construction Defects and Patent Trolling

    New York Developer gets Reprieve in Leasehold Battle

    Has Hydrogen's Time Finally Come?

    Construction Employment Rises in Half of the States

    The Little Ice Age and Delay Claims

    Los Angeles County Sues Utility Edison Over Deadly Wildfire

    Subcontractors Found Liable to Reimburse Insurer Defense Costs in Equitable Subrogation Action

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (08/15/23) – Manufacturing Soars with CHIPS Act, New Threats to U.S. Infrastructure and AI Innovation for One Company

    Manhattan Developer Breaks Ground on $520 Million Project

    Withdrawal Liability? Read your CBA

    California Restricts Principles of “General” Personal Jurisdiction

    Lewis Brisbois Launches New Practice Focusing on Supply Chain Issues

    Pre-Suit Settlement Offers and Construction Lien Actions
    Corporate Profile

    BABB MONTANA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Drawing from more than 4500 construction, architectural, and engineering related expert designations, the Babb, Montana Construction Expert Directory delivers a comprehensive construction and design expert support solution to lawyers and construction practice groups concerned with construction defect and claims litigation. BHA provides construction claims evaluation, testimony, and support services to the nation's leading construction practice groups, Fortune 500 builders, general liability carriers, owners, as well as a variety of public entities. Utilizing captive 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 Babb region.

    Babb Montana roofing and waterproofing expert witnessBabb Montana construction project management expert witnessBabb Montana construction expert testimonyBabb Montana construction expert witnessesBabb Montana engineering expert witnessBabb Montana structural concrete expertBabb Montana construction scheduling expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Babb, Montana

    Ninth Circuit Holds That Policies Covering Environmental Claims Do Not Have Aggregate Limits

    May 12, 2026 —
    In the case of County of San Bernardino v. Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania, the Ninth Circuit recently addressed the issue of whether general liability policies issued in the 1960s and 1970s included aggregate limits for claims arising under the premises-operations coverage in CGL policies. The difference between the policyholder’s interpretation of the policies’ limits clauses and the insurer’s interpretation was worth hundreds of millions of dollars in exposure for the insurer. The Court closely examined the policy language and extrinsic evidence from both the insurance industry’s drafting history and the parties before concluding that the policies were ambiguous. The Court construed that ambiguity in favor of the policyholder and ruled that aggregate limits did not apply to the claims at issue. The Court’s decision underscores the importance of carefully examining a policy’s limits, especially for older policies written before 1986 when the insurance industry revised the standard-form CGL policy to state the aggregate limits apply not only to products liability claims but to premises-operations claims as well. Decades of insurance industry drafting history confirms, as the policyholder’s submissions in this case indicate, that the industry well understood that operations claims like the environmental waste-disposal claims at issue here typically were not subject to aggregate limits. Reprinted courtesy of Lorelie S. Masters, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP and Joseph T. Niczky, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP Ms. Masters may be contacted at lmasters@hunton.com Mr. Niczky may be contacted at jniczky@hunton.com Read the full story...

    GRSM Secures Complete Judgment for Defense in Years-Long Dispute Spanning Multiple Venues

    June 22, 2026 —
    Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani’s Hartford, Connecticut, and Dallas offices recently secured a complete defense judgment and recovery of attorney’s fees and costs in an arbitration on behalf of a longtime client, concluding a dispute that lasted several years and traversed multiple jurisdictions. The dispute initially arose in Texas state court, and almost immediately, the claimant began pursuing the matter aggressively, a pattern that continued until the day judgment was entered in GRSM’s client’s favor. GRSM’s team mounted a strong defense, achieving an early success in compelling mandatory arbitration. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani

    Navigating Timelines and Technology: Patent Strategies for Space and Earth

    June 01, 2026 —
    More than half a century after the Apollo 11 landing fulfilled President John F. Kennedy’s bold vision, the global race back to the Moon is no longer theoretical. With renewed attention on NASA’s Artemis program and a surge of commercial investment in space infrastructure, lunar exploration is again shaping technology priorities here on Earth. Reprinted courtesy of Kate Nuehring Su, Engineering News-Record and Vanessa Wang, Engineering News-Record Read the full story...
    ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com

    $10.5M Settlement Ends George Washington Bridge Debris Liability Fight

    September 15, 2026 —
    A $10.5-million settlement that recently came to light has ended a six-year legal fight over whether a truck part that may have been lying on the George Washington Bridge roadway for more than 10 minutes was there long enough for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to have found and removed it before it caused a catastrophic accident. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bryan Gottlieb, Engineering News-Record
    Mr. Gottlieb may be contacted at gottliebb@enr.com

    Builders Risk/Construction All Risks and Delay in Start-Up Coverage for Large Energy Projects: Protecting Revenue Before Operations Begin

    September 21, 2026 —
    The Most Significant Loss May Be the Delay, Not the Damage Power and energy projects are uniquely vulnerable to losses during construction. Whether the project involves a utility-scale solar facility, battery storage installation, a wind farm, transmission project, LNG terminal, or conventional generation facility, loss events in this sector often have consequences far more impactful than the actual cost of repairing damaged property. Any number of construction losses can delay commercial operation of the facility by months, triggering lost revenues, financing impacts, contractual penalties, and investor concerns. In many cases, those delay-related losses significantly exceed the underlying repair costs. Construction All Risk (“CAR”) insurance and Delay in Start-Up (“DSU”) coverage are designed to respond to these exposures. However, recovering delay-related losses is far more complicated than many insureds anticipate, particularly when projects involve international stakeholders, global supply chains, and London market insurance placements. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Will Bennett, SDV Fenchurch
    Mr. Bennett may be contacted at will.bennett@sdvfenchurch.us

    Southwest Super Lawyers Recognizes 50 Snell & Wilmer Attorneys in 2026 Rankings

    June 15, 2026 —
    PHOENIX (April 22, 2026) – Snell & Wilmer is pleased to announce that 50 attorneys in the Phoenix and Tucson offices have been selected for inclusion in the 2026 Southwest Super Lawyers publication. Of those 50, four were recognized for the first time and 24 were recognized as Southwest Rising Stars. Super Lawyers is a listing of lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. The selection process is multi-phased and includes independent research, peer nominations, and peer evaluations. Super Lawyers was first published in 1991 by Law & Politics and was acquired by Thomson Reuters, Legal in February 2010. Thomson Reuters is a leading source of information for businesses and professionals. The below Snell & Wilmer attorneys have been selected for inclusion in the 2026 Southwest Super Lawyers rankings. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Snell & Wilmer

    Balancing the Right to Repair With Evidence Preservation in Construction Defect Litigation

    April 20, 2026 —
    Every major construction project comes with risk, whether it’s a warehouse build, a multifamily development or a major renovation. Parties tend to be aligned when things are proceeding as planned. But when something goes wrong—cracked concrete, water intrusion, systems that don’t perform as expected—those interests can quickly diverge. Property owners are often caught in the middle when construction defects surface. They’re expected to act quickly to limit damage and costs. But they also have legal obligations to preserve evidence and allow potentially responsible parties, such as contractors or designers, to observe testing, demolition and repairs. Additionally, owners often have duties to lenders and investors to fix problems promptly and pursue claims against those responsible. Meanwhile, contractors and other parties have obligations of their own—not to interfere with repairs and not to delay mitigation efforts while investigations are underway. What follows will examine how those competing responsibilities play out in construction defect disputes. Reprinted courtesy of Benton Wheatley & Anna Spicer, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

    Construction Liens: Liening for Amounts Not Yet Technically Due Does Not Mean Lien Is Fraudulent

    August 11, 2026 —
    A 2024 bankruptcy ruling, In re Edgewater Construction Group, Inc., 657 B.R. 668 (S.D.Fla. 2024), touched upon an interesting issue when it comes to construction liens. Is a construction lien fraudulent simply because the lien includes amounts not yet due? Not necessarily. In this bankruptcy dispute, the subcontractor debtor (that filed for bankruptcy) recorded two construction liens on projects. The general contractor argued in the bankruptcy court that the subcontractor debtor’s liens were fraudulent. As to the first lien, the general contractor argued that the lien was fraudulent because it included amounts that the debtor knew the general contractor had already paid to the debtor’s subcontractors/suppliers. The bankruptcy court disagreed: “The Court finds that, although the Debtor had been told that [the general contractor] had paid these subcontractors, in light of the ongoing dispute between Debtor and [the general contractor], it was reasonable for the Debtor to demand proof. Debtor’s subsequent filing of a partial satisfaction of lien once the Debtor received the requested proof of payment from [the general contractor] counters any claim of willful exaggeration.” In re Edgewater Construction Group, supra, at 672-673. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com