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

    New Mexico Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Case law precedent


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Grant County New Mexico

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    SW New Mexico Home Builders Association
    Local # 3270
    PO Box 1962
    Silver City, NM 88062
    http://www.rbigelow@gilanet.com

    Building Contractors Association of Otero County
    Local # 3283
    PO Box 4382
    Alamogordo, NM 88310


    Lincoln County Home Builders Association
    Local # 3252
    PO Box 2769
    Ruidoso, NM 88355
    http://www.ruidosobuilders.com

    South Eastern NM Home Builders Association
    Local # 3240
    PO Box 1132
    Roswell, NM 88202


    Building Industry Association of Southern New Mexico
    Local # 3254
    PO Box 2608
    Las Cruces, NM 88004
    http://www.biasnm.org

    Home Builders Association of Eastern New Mexico
    Local # 3230
    PO Box 953
    Clovis, NM 88102


    Home Builders Association of New Mexico
    Local # 3200
    5931 Office Blvd NE Ste 1
    Albuquerque, NM 87109
    http://www.nmhba.com


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Grant County New Mexico

    Congratulations to Associate Madeline Arcellana on Her Selection as a Top Rank Attorney in Southern Nevada!

    Expert Excluded After Never Viewing Damaged Property

    Conflicting Exclusions Result in Duty to Defend

    Court Throws Wet Blanket On Prime Contractor's Attorneys' Fees Request In Prompt Payment Case

    Colorado Federal Court Confirms Consequetial Property Damage, But Finds No Coverage for Subcontractor

    At the Intersection of Indemnity and Prevailing Wages

    ENR Northwest’s Top Contractors Survey Reveals Regional Uptick

    Properly Trigger the Performance Bond

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

    2022 Project of the Year: Linking Los Angeles

    One Nation, Under Renovation

    Landlords Challenge U.S. Eviction Ban and Continue to Oust Renters

    'Time to Be Human': Paul Doherty Talks Tech and Architecture

    Breach of Contract Exclusion Bars Coverage for Construction Defect Claim

    Insured's Claim for Water Damage Dismissed with Leave to Amend

    Mountain States Super Lawyers Recognizes 26 Utah Snell & Wilmer Attorneys in 2025 Rankings

    Landmark Contractor Licensing Case Limits Disgorgement Remedy in California

    California Supreme Court Holds “Notice-Prejudice” Rule is “Fundamental Public Policy” of California, May Override Choice of Law Provisions in Policies

    Implied Warranties for Infrastructure in Florida Construction Defect Claims

    The New Industrial Revolution: Rebuilding America and the World

    State Farm Too Quick To Deny Coverage, Court Rules

    FEMA Fire Management Assistance Granted for the French Fire

    Welcome to SubTropolis: The Massive Business Complex Buried Under Kansas City

    New York Assembly Reconsiders ‘Bad Faith’ Bill

    Motion for Summary Judgment Granted in Significant California Public Utilities Suit

    Commercial Construction Heating Up

    Court Holds That Property Insurance Does Not Cover Economic Loss From Purchasing Counterfeit Vintage Wine

    Unlicensed Contractors Caught in a Sting Operation

    Eight Things You Need to Know About the AAA’s New Construction Arbitration Rules

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

    Occurrence Found, Business Risk Exclusions Do Not Bar Coverage for Construction Defects

    Can an Architect, Hired by an Owner, Be Sued by the General Contractor?

    Privity Problems Continue for Additional Insureds in the Second Circuit

    Beyond the Disneyland Resort: Museums

    Video: Contractors’ Update on New Regulations Governing Commercial Use of Drones

    Quick Note: Don’t Sue Your Arbitrator

    OSHA Begins Enforcement of its Respirable Crystalline Silica in Construction Standard. Try Saying That Five Times Real Fast

    Quick Note: Staying, Not Dismissing, Arbitrable Disputes Under Federal Arbitration Act

    Performing Work with a Suspended CSLB License Costs Big: Subcontractor Faces $18,000,000 Disgorgement

    Hunton Andrews Kurth’s Insurance Recovery Practice, Partners Larry Bracken and Mike Levine Receive Band 1 Honors from Chambers USA in Georgia

    Stop by BHA’s Booth at WCC and Support the Susan G. Komen Foundation

    Charles Carter v. Pulte Home Corporation

    Congratulations to Jonathan Kaplan on his Promotion to Partner!

    Wilke Fleury Celebrates the Addition of Two New Partners

    The Law Clinic Paves Way to the Digitalization of Built Environment Processes

    Used French Fry Oil Fuels London Offices as Buildings Go Green

    Hail Drives Construction Spending in Amarillo

    Nevada State Senator Says HOA Scandal Shows Need for Construction Defect Reform

    Seven Proactive Steps to Avoid Construction Delay Disputes

    Orion Group Holdings Honored with Leadership in Safety Award
    Corporate Profile

    GRANT COUNTY NEW MEXICO CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Through over 4500 construction defect and claims related expert designations, the Grant County, New Mexico Construction Expert Directory provides a wide spectrum of trial support and consulting services to legal professionals and construction practice groups seeking effective resolution of construction defect and claims matters. BHA provides construction related litigation support and expert witness services to the industry's leading construction attorneys, Fortune 500 builders, insurers, owners, as well as a variety of public entities. Utilizing captive assets which comprise construction cost and scheduling experts, registered design professionals, forensic engineers, certified professional estimators, the firm brings national experience and local capabilities to Grant County and the surrounding areas.

    Grant County New Mexico testifying construction expert witnessGrant County New Mexico construction forensic expert witnessGrant County New Mexico delay claim expert witnessGrant County New Mexico construction defect expert witnessGrant County New Mexico construction expert testimonyGrant County New Mexico construction expertsGrant County New Mexico eifs expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Grant County, New Mexico

    The Grenfell & Champlain Towers: Risk Management Considerations in the Wake of Catastrophic Loss — A UK/US Comparison

    June 02, 2026 —
    1. Introduction As part of the multinational collaborative relationship between Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Fenchurch Law, we continually find ourselves in conversations about the sometimes subtle but sometimes drastic differences between risk management and coverage considerations from one country to the next. These differences are often highlighted by the fallout from large catastrophic losses that are widely publicized and illuminate sometimes widespread risks and perils that many others may be facing in the coming years. The response of governments and their subdivisions to the needs of victims and/or commercial parties, and insurance markets’ evaluation of and reactions to catastrophic losses vary widely from country to country and jurisdiction. In this article, we discuss these responses and reactions in the cases of the Grenfell Tower Fire in London, England, and the Champlain Tower collapse in Surfside, Florida, within the United States. These two widely publicized losses involved different risk management and insurance considerations based on where they occurred. They also saw substantially different government responses and raised varied questions about what the next steps are for their respective commercial and insurance markets. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Eric M. Clarkson, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Clarkson may be contacted at EClarkson@sdvlaw.com

    Construction Liens and the “Substantial Performance” Doctrine

    April 08, 2026 —
    In a recent case dealing with a construction lien, the driving issue was whether the air conditioning contractor “substantially performed” before recording its construction lien against residential property. The importance here pertains to the substantial performance doctrine with respect to construction liens. The Third District Court of Appeal explained, with relevant citations, this doctrine as follows: Under Florida law, a contractor is entitled to a mechanic’s lien if he complies with all provisions of Chapter 713, governing construction liens, and “has substantially performed the contract.” Grant v. Wester, 679 So. 2d 1301, 1307 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (quotation omitted); Langley v. Knowles, 958 So. 2d 1149, 1151 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (“The substantial performance doctrine recognizes that a contactor who complies with all of the provisions of the contactor’s lien statute is entitled to enforce a lien if he has substantially, but not completely, performed his contractual obligations.”). Substantial performance is performance “so nearly equivalent to what was bargained for that it would be unreasonable to deny the promisee the full contract price subject to the promisor’s right to recover whatever damages may have been occasioned him by the promisee’s failure to render full performance.” Ocean Ridge Dev. Corp. v. Quality Plastering, Inc., 247 So. 2d 72, 75 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971). Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    EPA Steps Back, Arizona Moves Forward

    May 12, 2026 —
    In a significant development for Arizona’s business community and environmental policymakers, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has paused its planned reclassification of Maricopa County from “Moderate” to “Serious” ozone nonattainment status pursuant to the Clean Air Act’s National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). This decision marks a shift in federal air policy — one that recognizes the unique challenges faced by regions like metro Phoenix, where environmental conditions beyond local control are often key contributors to air quality readings. The EPA’s move follows a series of meetings between EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, Arizona elected officials, and business and civic leaders, including a recent roundtable in Phoenix convened by U.S. Senator Mark Kelly. In announcing the pause, Zeldin acknowledged the need for flexibility and fairness in the application of Clean Air Act standards, especially when emissions from other states, nations, and natural events significantly influence local air quality. Reprinted courtesy of Patrick J. Paul, Snell & Wilmer, John Habib, Snell & Wilmer and Sukhmani K. Singh, Snell & Wilmer Mr. Paul may be contacted at ppaul@swlaw.com Mr. Habib may be contacted at jhabib@swlaw.com Ms. Singh may be contacted at ssingh@swlaw.com Read the full story...

    Insufficient Notice of Commencement and Construction Lien Rights

    August 03, 2026 —
    When a party is preserving their construction lien rights, the party will look to the recorded Notice of Commencement. This is the recorded document that provides the lienor with the information for purposes of preserving construction lien rights. A Notice to Owner company will typically rely on the Notice of Commencement to serve Notices to Owners from lower tiers not in contract with the owner. However, when it comes to preparing the lien, a lienor should look beyond just the Notice of Commencement and also look to the property appraiser’s website as a backstop. In a recent case, a window company had the homeowner sign the Notice of Commencement and then filled in the information. The company naturally did this for the convenience of the homeowner that probably was unfamiliar with the Notice of Commencement process. Regardless, information in the Notice of Commencement was inaccurate. It failed to include all the real property owners. Thus, when a payment dispute arose and a construction lien was prepared, it did not identify all of the real property owners. All of the real property owners were added later during the pendency of a lien foreclosure lawsuit. The trial court denied the lien because of the defective / insufficient Notice of Commencement — the lienor assumed the risk of error by filling out the information in the Notice of Commencement. The trial court further denied the lien holding that because the work did not commence within 90 days of the Notice of Commencement, the Notice of Commencement is void. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    White and Williams LLP Ranked in the Chambers USA 2026 Guide

    June 15, 2026 —
    White and Williams LLP is proud to celebrate the Chambers USA 2026 Guide which has ranked several of the Firm's attorneys and practice groups, underscoring the Firm's overall commitment to providing client service excellence. The Chambers USA 2026 Guide recognized attorneys Tim Davis, Managing Partner, and Nancy Frantz, Chair of the Real Estate Group, for Real Estate: Finance in the state of Pennsylvania. Randy Maniloff, Partner, Patricia Santelle, Chair Emeritus/Former Managing Partner, and Robert Walsh, Partner were ranked for Insurance in Pennsylvania, and Thomas Pinney, Partner, was ranked in Pennsylvania for Bankruptcy/Restructuring. In the state of Maryland, Partners David Gilliss and Eric Korphage were recognized for their work in Construction. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    Newmeyer Dillion Partner Jeff Masters Recognized by Chambers USA for Representation of Insurance Policyholders

    June 08, 2026 —
    NEWPORT BEACH, Calif. – June 4, 2026 – Newmeyer Dillion is proud to announce that litigation partner Jeffrey D. Masters has been ranked among a select group of California lawyers representing insurance policyholders in the 2026 edition of Chambers USA. This marks two consecutive years of recognition for Masters by this prestigious international attorney rating resource. "This recognition by Chambers and Partners is a testament to Jeff’s dedication to our clients," said Managing Partner, Paul Tetzloff. "We are thrilled to see his hard work acknowledged and the level of passion and care that he delivers to clients fully recognized." Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Newmeyer Dillion

    Settlement Agreements and Contracts Require a Meeting of the Minds

    July 20, 2026 —
    A settlement agreement does not need to be executed for it to be enforceable as long as there was a MEETING OF THE MINDS. The same rings true for any contract regardless of whether the contract is signed – THERE NEEDS TO BE A MEETING OF THE MINDS. In a recent case dealing with the settlement agreement on a construction lien, the essential settlement terms (money and mutual release) were memorialized in an e-mail exchange between the parties (owner and subcontractor). The settlement required the owner to pay the principal amount plus some attorney’s fees and then a mutual general release would be prepared. In response to the confirmatory email, the owner sent a check, which the subcontractor deposited, but the owner refused to sign the release signed and sent by the subcontractor. The owner further claimed it doesn’t need to pay the attorney’s fees because the lien amount was paid in full. The subcontractor sued arguing the owner breached the terms of the settlement. The appellate court agreed. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    U.S. Supreme Court Decision Alters Course of $745M Louisiana Coastal Damage Judgment

    June 15, 2026 —
    The U.S. Supreme Court has issued a unanimous decision allowing oil and gas companies to move Louisiana coastal erosion lawsuits from state court to federal court under the federal officer removal statute. While the ruling is procedural, it carries significant implications for environmental- and energy-related risks. The case, Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana, Slip Op. 24-813 (April 17, 2026), addressed a threshold jurisdictional question but has broader significance for environmental and climate related litigation. State courts are often viewed as more favorable forums for plaintiffs asserting environmental damage claims, particularly those brought by governmental entities. The opinion issued on April 17, 2026 is the latest development in long-running Louisiana coastal litigation that began more than a decade ago. Starting in 2013, Louisiana parishes filed 42 lawsuits against oil and gas companies alleging environmental damage related to historic oil field operations. The parishes alleged that oil and gas companies violated state coastal management laws by failing to properly restore impacted areas. Chevron sought to remove the cases from state court under 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1), known as federal officer removal, which provides federal jurisdiction over “any person acting under [an] officer” of the United States "for or relating to any act under color of such office." The Fifth Circuit rejected the argument and remanded the case, and others like it, to state court. Trial began in March 2025 in Point à la Hache, Louisiana. On April 4, 2025, the jury awarded a total of $745 million to compensate for land loss, contamination and abandoned equipment. On June 16, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review the question of whether a federal contractor can remove to federal court when sued for oil-production activities undertaken to fulfill a federal oil-refinement contract. Reprinted courtesy of Jennifer Kretschmann, Lewis Brisbois and Jennifer E. Michel, Lewis Brisbois Ms. Kretschmann may be contacted at Jennifer.Kretschmann@lewisbrisbois.com Ms. Michel may be contacted at Jenny.Michel@lewisbrisbois.com Read the full story...