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

    New York Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Case law precedent


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Downsville 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
    Southern Tier Home Builders & Rem Assoc
    Local # 3330
    2807 North St
    Endwell, NY 13760
    http://www.sthbra.com

    Finger Lakes Home Builders & Remodelers Association
    Local # 3312
    PO Box 421
    Big Flats, NY 14814
    http://www.fingerlakesbuilders.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

    Builders Association of the Hudson Valley
    Local # 3348
    1161 Little Britain Rd
    New Windsor, NY 12553
    http://www.hvbuilder.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


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Downsville New York

    Georgia Law: “An Occurrence Can Arise Where Faulty Workmanship Causes Unforeseen or Unexpected Damage to Other Property”

    Is Your Construction Business Feeling the Effects of the Final DBA Rule?

    Sixth Circuit Rejects Claim for Reverse Bad Faith

    AI and the Optimization of Construction Projects

    Collapse Claim Dismissed

    BWB&O’s Los Angeles Office Obtains Major Victory in Arbitration!

    Illinois Court Addresses Level of Evidence Necessary to Prevent Summary Judgment in Hail Damage Claim

    Insurer’s Motion for Summary Judgment Based on Earth Movement Exclusion Denied

    Attempt to Overrule Trial Court's Order to Produce Underwriting Manual Fails

    Construction Termination Part 2: How to Handle Construction Administration When the Contractor Is Getting Fired

    The California Legislature Return the Power Back to the People by Passing the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018

    Safety Data: Noon Presents the Hour of Greatest Danger

    The Texas Storm – Guidance for Contractors

    Florida Accuses Pool Contractor of Violating Laws

    Million-Dollar U.S. Housing Loans Surge to Record Level

    Finalists in San Diego’s Moving Parklet Design Competition Announced

    High School Gym Closed by Construction Defects

    Bad Faith and a Partial Summary Judgment in Seattle Construction Defect Case

    Subsequent Purchaser Can Assert Claims for Construction Defects

    ASCE Statement on House Passage of the Water Resources Development Act of 2024

    VOSH Jumps Into the Employee Misclassification Pool

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

    At Least 46 Killed in Taiwanese Apartment Building Inferno

    Florida County Suspends Impact Fees to Spur Development

    Breaking Ground On New California Public Works Prevailing Wage Requirements

    Construction Contract Clauses That May or May Not Have Your Vote – Part 3

    Another Guilty Plea In Nevada Construction Defect Fraud Case

    Next Steps for Policyholders in the Aftermath of the California Wildfires

    Spa High-Rise Residents Frustrated by Construction Defects

    Court Agrees to Stay Coverage Matter While Underlying State Action is Pending

    A Closer Look at an HOA Board Member’s Duty to Homeowners

    Hawaii Supreme Court Construes Designated Premises Endorsement In Insured's Favor

    Homebuilding in Las Vegas Slows but Doesn’t Fall

    Unlicensed Contractor Shoots for the Stars . . . Sputters on Takeoff

    Toll Brothers Faces Construction Defect Lawsuit in New Jersey

    NYC Supertall Tower Condo Board Sues Over Alleged Construction, Design 'Defects'

    Interior Designer Licensure

    Eleventh Circuit Finds No “Property Damage” Where Defective Component Failed to Cause Damage to Other Non-Defective Components

    Construction Defect Not an Occurrence in Ohio

    Release Language Extended To Successor Entity But Only Covered “Known” Claims

    Saudi Arabia Awards Contracts for Megacity Neom’s Worker Housing

    In All Fairness: Illinois Appellate Court Finds That Arbitration Clause in a Residential Construction Contract Was Unconscionable and Unenforceable

    XL Group Pairs with America Contractor’s Insurance Group to Improve Quality of Construction

    Contractors Can No Longer Make Roof Repairs Following Their Own Inspections

    Court Finds No Occurrence for Installation of Defective flooring and Explains Coverage for Attorney Fee Awards

    Is Arbitration Always the Answer?

    Oregon to Add 258,000 Jobs by 2022, State Data Shows

    The Hazards of Carrier-Specific Manuscript Language: Ohio Casualty's Off-Premises Property Damage and Contractors' E&O Endorsements

    Gibbs Giden is Pleased to Announce Four New Partners and Two New Associates

    Unlocking the Hidden Power of Zoning, for Good or Bad
    Corporate Profile

    DOWNSVILLE NEW YORK CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    With over four thousand construction claims related expert witness designations, the Downsville, New York Construction Expert Directory delivers a streamlined multi-disciplinary expert retention and support solution to lawyers and construction practice groups seeking effective resolution of construction defect and claims matters. BHA provides construction related trial support and expert consulting services to the construction industry's most recognized companies, legal professionals, Fortune 500 builders, CGL carriers, owners, as well as a variety of state and local government agencies. Utilizing captive resources which comprise building envelope and design experts, forensic engineers, forensic architects, and construction cost and scheduling consultants, the firm brings national experience and local capabilities to Downsville and the surrounding areas.

    Downsville New York construction claims expert witnessDownsville New York construction safety expertDownsville New York consulting general contractorDownsville New York construction cost estimating expert witnessDownsville New York construction defect expert witnessDownsville New York building envelope expert witnessDownsville New York eifs expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Downsville, New York

    Colorado Supreme Court Reverses Course on Public Project Liens: Key Takeaways From Wadsworth v. Regional Rail Partners

    July 27, 2026 —
    On April 6, 2026, the Colorado Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in Ralph L. Wadsworth Construction Company, LLC v. Regional Rail Partners, 2026 CO 19, reversing the Colorado Court of Appeals and providing much-needed clarity regarding verified statements of claim (VSOCs) under the Colorado Public Works Act, C.R.S. §§ 38-26-101 et seq. The decision resolves two issues that have generated significant concern among construction industry professionals since the Court of Appeals issued its opinion on August 1, 2024. Under C.R.S. § 38-26-107(1), a subcontractor on a public works project may file a VSOC with the contracting public entity for amounts due and unpaid for “…furnished labor, materials, sustenance, or other supplies used or consumed by a contractor or his or her subcontractor in or about the performance of the work contracted to be done or that supplies laborers, rental machinery, tools, or equipment to the extent used in the prosecution of the work….” If a claimant files a VSOC for “an amount greater than the amount due” without a reasonable possibility that the amount is due and with knowledge that the claim is excessive, the claimant “shall forfeit all rights to the amount claimed” and becomes liable for the opposing party’s costs and attorneys’ fees. C.R.S. § 38-26-110. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Amanda E. McKinlay, Snell & Wilmer
    Ms. McKinlay may be contacted at amckinlay@swlaw.com

    New Executive Order on AI Innovation and Security: Key Takeaways for the Construction Industry

    June 15, 2026 —
    On June 2, 2026, President Trump signed an Executive Order titled “Promoting Advanced Artificial Intelligence Innovation and Security.” At its core, the Order is a cybersecurity and national-security measure rather than a broad regulation of how private companies develop or use AI. It directs federal agencies to harden government systems against AI-enabled cyber threats, establishes voluntary frameworks for collaboration between the federal government and the AI and critical-infrastructure sectors, and strengthens criminal enforcement against the malicious use of AI. Notably, the Order expressly disclaims any intent to create a “mandatory governmental licensing, preclearance, or permitting” regime for the “development, publication, release, or distribution of new AI models.” Instead, the Executive Order seeks to “promote AI innovation and security” by working with the private sector to modernize government and private-sector information systems and harden them against external threats, protect intellectual property from exploitation or theft, and cultivate American AI capabilities. Reprinted courtesy of Richard R. Volack, Peckar & Abramson, PC and Denis Serkin, Peckar & Abramson, PC Mr. Volack may be contacted at rvolack@pecklaw.com Mr. Serkin may be contacted at dserkin@pecklaw.com Read the full story...

    The “Pay When Paid” Clause in California Construction—Strategies as the Battle Continues

    August 03, 2026 —
    It is well known in California Construction circles that the “Pay If Paid” clause is illegal in this state. There is a great distinction, though, between this clause and a similar clause, known as a “Pay When Paid” clause. A pay if paid clause allows a contractor to tell a subcontractor that if the contractor is unpaid for the subcontractor’s work, then the contractor has no legal obligation to pay the subcontractor, ever. For a great variety of reasons, the California Supreme Court, in the case of Wm. R. Clarke Corp v. Safeco Ins. Co. of America (1997) 15 Cal.4th 882, declared this type of clause illegal in California Construction. Although the pay if paid clause is illegal in California, the pay when paid clause is still perfectly legal and is found in many subcontracts that contractors issue to their subcontractors. The pay when paid clause allows a contractor to delay paying its subcontractors until the dispute between the contractor and the property owner over payment has been resolved and the contractor is paid by the property owner. Although seemingly reasonable (since it merely delays payment until the contractor is paid by the owner, thereby providing a funding source to pay subcontractors), significant problems still arise. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, Porter Law Group
    Mr. Porter may be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com

    Construction Seyt Named a Top Construction Blog by FeedSpot

    March 31, 2026 —
    Since 2019, we have strived to bring our readers practical, useful insights on recent trends shaping our industry. Whether you are a contractor, designer, developer, attorney, or industry professional, our goal is to equip you with the knowledge to navigate your business with that much more confidence. We are honored that “The Construction Seyt” has been named by FeedSpot as a “Best Construction Blog” to follow for 2026. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Seyfarth Shaw LLP

    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...

    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

    HHMR and Every One of its Partners Recognized by Legal 500 in Denver Elite – Real Estate

    April 20, 2026 —
    Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC is pleased to announce its recognition as a Tier 1 firm in the Denver Elite rankings for Real Estate, a category that includes construction law and construction litigation, by The Legal 500. In addition, each of the firm’s partners has been individually recognized in the same rankings. The firm’s individual recognitions include: Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.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...