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

    New York Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Case law precedent


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Austerlitz New York

    State license is required for Asbestos Abatement. All other licensing is done at the local level. Businesses must register with the Secretary of State.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Finger Lakes Home Builders & Remodelers Association
    Local # 3312
    PO Box 421
    Big Flats, NY 14814
    http://www.fingerlakesbuilders.com

    Southern Tier Home Builders & Rem Assoc
    Local # 3330
    2807 North St
    Endwell, NY 13760
    http://www.sthbra.com

    Tompkins/Cortland Bldrs&Remo
    Local # 3382
    PO Box 202
    Cortland, NY 13045
    http://www.tcbra.com

    New York State Bldrs Assn
    Local # 3300
    1 Commerce Plz Ste 704
    Albany, NY 12210
    http://www.nysba.com

    Capital Region B & R Assoc
    Local # 3305
    1202 Troy-Schenectady Road Ste 7
    Latham, NY 12110
    http://www.crbra.com

    Buffalo Niagara Builders Association
    Local # 3306
    90 Sylvan Pkwy
    West Amherst, NY 14228
    http://www.bnba.org

    Home Builders Association of Central New York Inc
    Local # 3386
    3675 James St
    Syracuse, NY 13206
    http://www.hbaofcny.com


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Austerlitz New York

    Arkansas: Avoiding the "Made Whole" Doctrine Through Dépeçage

    Appraisers’ Failure to Perform Assessment of Property’s Existence or Damage is Reversible Error

    Significant Ruling in PFAS Litigation Could Impact Insurance Coverage

    A Court-Side Seat: As SCOTUS Decides Another Regulatory “Takings” Case, a Flurry of Action at EPA

    David Samani Joins BHBA Podcast on Mediation Best Practices

    Updated: Happenings in and around the West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Chambers USA Recognizes GRSM as 2026 Industry Leader

    Construction Insurance Rates Up in the United States

    Denver Condo Development Increasing, with Caution

    New Florida Bill Shortens Time for Construction-Defect Lawsuits

    A Win for Clarity: What a Recent Federal Court Decision Means for Davis-Bacon Compliance

    Federal District Court Addresses Material Misrepresentation in First Party Property Damage Claim

    Avoiding Construction Defect “Nightmares” in Florida

    Fifth Circuit Certifies Eight-Corners Duty to Defend Issue to Texas Supreme Court

    Landlords Beware: Subordination Agreements

    Montrose Language Interpreted: How Many Policies Are Implicated By A Construction Defect That Later Causes a Flood?

    How a Maryland County Created the Gold Standard for Building Emissions Reduction

    Georgia Coal-to-Solar Pivot Shows the Way on Climate Regs

    Assessing Defective Design Liability on Federal Design-Build Projects

    Colorado Court of Appeals Defines “Substantial Completion” for Subcontractors’ Work so as to Shorten the Period of Time in Which They Can Be Sued

    Apartment Boom in Denver a Shortcut Around Condo Construction Defect Suits?

    The Condo Conundrum: 10 Reasons Why There's a 'For Sale' Shortage in Seattle

    Temporary Obstructions Are a Permanent Problem Under the Americans with Disabilities Act

    The Partial Building Collapse of the 12-Story Florida Condo

    Your Bad Faith Jury Instruction Against an Insurer is Important

    Suzanne Pollack Elected to Lawyers Club of San Diego 2021 Board of Directors

    Will Protecting Copyrights Get Easier for Architects?

    BHA Has a Nice Swing: Firm Supports NCHV and Final Salute at 2017 WCC Seminar

    Expired Contract Not Revived Due to Sovereign Immunity and the Ex Contractu Clause

    Update Regarding New York’s New Registration Requirement for Contractors and Subcontractors Performing Public Works and Covered Private Projects

    Connecticut Court Clarifies a Limit on Payment Bond Claims for Public Projects

    No Cross-Complaint Needed: Contractor Can Fight Co-Defendant’s Summary Judgment

    EPC Contractors Procuring from Foreign Companies need to Reconsider their Contracts

    Harmon Hotel Construction Defect Update

    Formal Request for Time Extension Not Always Required to Support Constructive Acceleration

    The Johnstown Dam Failure, as Seen in the Pages of ENR in 1889

    How the Parking Garage Conquered the City

    A Proactive Approach to Construction Safety

    68 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys Recognized in 5th Edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America

    2026 Top Business Risks for Construction and Engineering Companies

    In New Orleans, Katrina Taught a Lesson in Local Resilience

    How U.S. Design and Architecture Firms Can Profit from the Chinese Market and Avoid Pitfalls

    No Bad Faith In Filing Interpleader

    Vacant Building Negates Coverage for Broken Pipe

    Industry News: New Partner at Burdman Law Group

    Happenings in and around the 2016 West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Coverage Article - To Settle or Not To Settle?

    Promptly Notifying Your Insurer of a Claim Matters

    Limitations of Liability Provisions in Construction Contracts: A Means to Manage Risk and Limit Financial Exposure

    Fixing That Mistake
    Corporate Profile

    AUSTERLITZ NEW YORK CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    With over 4500 construction and design related expert witness designations, the Austerlitz, New York Construction Expert Directory provides a streamlined multi-disciplinary expert retention and support solution to legal professionals and construction practice groups concerned with construction defect and claims matters. BHA provides construction related consulting and expert witness support services to the industry's most recognized construction attorneys, Fortune 500 builders, CGL carriers, owners, as well as a variety of public entities. In connection with in house personnel 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 Austerlitz region.

    Austerlitz New York architectural expert witnessAusterlitz New York concrete expert witnessAusterlitz New York consulting architect expert witnessAusterlitz New York construction expert witness public projectsAusterlitz New York expert witness roofingAusterlitz New York expert witness structural engineerAusterlitz New York architect expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Austerlitz, New York

    Ohio Supreme Court Blocks Ballot Measure Targeting $4B AWS Data Center

    October 26, 2026 —
    Ohio's High Court on Sept. 18 blocked a ballot measure that could have imposed new operating restrictions and citizen lawsuits on a planned $4-billion Amazon Web Services data center campus in Wilmington, about 35 miles southeast of Dayton. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bryan Gottlieb, Engineering News-Record
    Mr. Gottlieb may be contacted at gottliebb@enr.com

    Urban Digital Twins: How Virtual Cities Could Help Build Smarter Cities

    August 11, 2026 —
    Traffic congestion, endless construction, flooded streets and power outages. For city leaders and residents alike, these disruptions are simply part of daily urban life. But an emerging tool, known as the urban digital twin, could help cities anticipate problems before they occur by allowing planners to simulate responses, stress-test infrastructure, and evaluate decisions before implementing them in the real world. What Is an Urban Digital Twin? An urban digital twin is a dynamic, data-driven virtual model of a real city. It uses AI analytics and combines 3D modeling with real-time data and information from sources such as IoT sensors, traffic cameras, satellite feeds, infrastructure databases, utility networks, and environmental data including weather systems and heat maps to create a continuously updated digital representation of the urban environment that mirrors infrastructure, movement and systems in real time. In other words, it is a living digital replica of a city. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury

    The Architects Who Dream of a New Stone Age

    October 26, 2026 —
    Most of the world’s longest-standing buildings have one thing in common: They are made from stone. Still, you’d be hard-pressed to find this civilization-outlasting material as a structural element in modern construction. Many stone buildings are imposters: thin veneers of limestone or granite disguising concrete and steel skeletons. In its day job as Earth’s crust, stone is currently holding up entire cities, countries and continents. But it’s rarely used to its full potential as a load-bearing material that can be stronger than concrete. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jennifer Hahn, Bloomberg

    11 Payne & Fears Attorneys Honored by Best Lawyers

    August 24, 2026 —
    Congratulations to the 11 Payne & Fears attorneys included in the 2027 Edition of “Lawyer of the Year” and The Best Lawyers In America®. Attorneys have been recognized in the following practice areas: “Lawyer of the Year” (2027 Edition) Orange County
    • Benjamin A. Nix
      • Trade Secrets Law
    The Best Lawyers in America® (2027 Edition) Irvine, CA
    • Jeffrey K. Brown
      • Employment Law – Management
      • Labor Law – Management
      • Litigation – Labor and Employment
    • Daniel F. Fears
      • Employment Law – Management
      • Labor Law – Management
      • Litigation – Labor and Employment
    • Daniel M. Livingston
      • Commercial Litigation
      • Litigation – Real Estate
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Payne & Fears

    What Massachusetts Contractors and Developers Can Learn from Cannistraro v. Columbia Construction

    July 13, 2026 —
    Introduction On June 26, 2026 the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court issued its decision in J.C. Cannistraro, LLC v. Columbia Construction Co.—a holding that sits at the intersection of Prompt Pay Act compliance and the Massachusetts Arbitration Act.[1] Most already know that the Massachusetts Prompt Pay Act (PPA) imposes strict timing and certification requirements for rejecting payment applications and proposed change orders on projects valued at $3 million or more. Most notably, the PPA requires the paying party to give the payee written notice of its approval or rejection of progress applications and proposed changes within 15 days of receipt, which notice must include a “factual and contractual basis for the rejection” and must be “certified as made in good faith.”[2] In the absence of a timely certified notice, payment is “deemed to be approved” unless the payor properly rejects payment before it comes due.[3] Reprinted courtesy of Anthony LaPlaca, Seyfarth Shaw LLP and Luke Marston, Seyfarth Shaw LLP Mr. LaPlaca may be contacted at alaplaca@seyfarth.com Mr. Marston may be contacted at lmarston@seyfarth.com Read the full story...

    That’s a Wrap! Pennsylvania Court Holds Arbitration Clause in Online Agreement Unenforceable

    May 14, 2026 —
    In Duffy v. Tatum, 2026 Pa. Super. LEXIS 112, 2026 PA Super 41, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania (Superior Court) considered whether an arbitration provision contained in the online Terms of Service on the defendant’s website were enforceable. The plaintiff, Daniel Duffy (Duffy), visited the website of defendant, Dolly, Inc. (Dolly), to purchase moving services. Duffy selected the number of movers, items to be moved and the type of vehicle needed. To complete the booking, the website required Duffy to checkmark a box labeled “By checking this box I accept the Dolly Terms of Service.” Duffy did not have to open the link or scroll to the bottom of the agreement before being able to click on the checkmark box. The Terms of Service included an arbitration provision requiring that any dispute related to the moving services to be resolved by arbitration in accordance with the American Arbitration Association. The Terms of Service did not include any statement that the user was waiving the right to a jury trial. The Superior Court found the internet Terms of Service unenforceable. During the moving process, an accident occurred and injured Duffy. In May 2024, Duffy and his wife sued Dolly and other related entities alleging negligence and loss of consortium. Dolly filed preliminary objections alleging that the parties agreed to alternative dispute resolution. The lower court overruled the preliminary objections, finding that Dolly’s website did not provide reasonably obvious notice of its Terms of Service to Duffy and, as such, Duffy never agreed to waive his constructional right to a jury trial. Dolly filed an appeal to the Superior Court. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com

    Colorado’s New Mechanics’ Lien Protections: What S.B. 26-074 Means for Your Next Project

    October 27, 2026 —
    Starting August 12, 2026, Colorado’s mechanics’ lien statute underwent its most significant update in years. Colorado’s General Assembly enacted Senate Bill 26-074 on April 6, 2026, and the new law directly addressed a problem that has plagued contractors and subcontractors for decades. For years, a contractor and subcontractor who filed a lien for the full amount it believed was due — particularly when that amount included disputed costs, delay damages, or lost productivity — risked triggering the “excessive lien” penalty. That penalty could force the claimant to forfeit its lien rights entirely and pay the other side’s attorney fees. The new law expands the categories of costs to be claimed by good-faith lien claimants, while still protecting against truly abusive filings. General contractors, subcontractors, suppliers, owners, and lenders all need to understand these changes. What the Bill Changed 1. Lien Value May Include Disputed Amounts The bill amends the core lien statute to insert the phrase “whether disputed or undisputed” into the description of lienable value. Prior law referenced only “the value” of labor, services, or materials furnished. The new text confirms that a lien can attach for amounts the parties still dispute. A claimant no longer needs the owner or general contractor to agree on the amount before filing. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Maria Conversa, Snell & Wilmer
    Ms. Conversa may be contacted at mconversa@swlaw.com

    Differing Site Conditions Claim Requires a Misrepresentation

    May 14, 2026 —
    If you are entertaining a differing site conditions claim, consider this Third District Court of Appeals case from the mid-90s. In Hendry Corp. v. Metropolitan Dade County, 648 So.2d 140 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995), a contractor was hired by Dade County to demolish the old Rickenbacker Causeway in Miami. The original 1941 plans of the causeway were made available to contractors. The lowest bidding contractor that was awarded the project based its bid “on its conclusion that the pilings supporting the old bridge were made of concrete.” Hendry, supra at 141. The contractor based this conclusion on the original plans, its visual observation, and experience. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com