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

    Oregon Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: (HB 2525 Chap. 701; HB2389) If an owner sends a builder a notice of defect within the time allowed for the owner to commence a court action against that contractor, the time for the owner to commence the action shall be extended, notwithstanding any statute of limitation or statute of ultimate repose, until the later of 120 days after written receipt of builders intention to repair, replace the defect, make monetary compensation or reject the claim. Upon receipt of notice, builder has 14 days to inspect the alleged defect. They then have no more than 90 days to communicate their intention The homebuyer must respond to the builder response within 30 days of receipt. The law requires builder notifies homebuyer of NOR before purchase.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Hebo Oregon

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Home Builders Association of Marion and Polk Counties
    Local # 3878
    385 Taylor St NE
    Salem, OR 97301
    http://www.homebuildersassociation.org

    Oregon Home Builders Association
    Local # 3800
    375 Taylor St NE
    Salem, OR 97301
    http://www.oregonhba.com

    Home Builders Association of Metro Portland
    Local # 3862
    15555 SW Bangy Rd Ste 301
    Lake Oswego, OR 97035
    http://www.homebuildersportland.org

    Baker County Chapter
    Local # 3802
    3470 10th St
    Baker City, OR 97814


    Lincoln County Home Builders Association
    Local # 3858
    PO Box 440
    Tangent, OR 97389
    http://www.lincolncountyhba.org

    Willamette Valley Home Builders Association
    Local # 3805
    PO Box 440 32054 Old Hwy 34
    Tangent, OR 97389
    http://www.wvhba.com

    Northeast Oregon Chapter
    Local # 3860
    PO Box 436
    Hermiston, OR 97838



    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Hebo Oregon

    County Officials Refute Resident’s Statement that Defect Repairs Improper

    Quick Note: Expert Testimony – Back to the Frye Test in Florida

    Insurer's Daubert Challenge to Insured's Expert Partially Successful

    Missouri Legislature Passes Bill to Drastically Change Missouri’s “Consent Judgment” Statute

    Appeals Court Affirms Carrier’s Duty to Pay Costs Taxed Against Insured in Construction Defect Suit

    No Third-Quarter Gain for Construction

    Bridges Need More Attention

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (10/16/24) – Chevron Ruling’s Impact on Construction Industry, New Kind of Public Housing and Policy Recommendations from Sustainable Building Groups

    Last Parcel of Rancho del Oro Masterplan Purchased by Cornerstone Communties

    Peckar & Abramson Once Again Recognized Among Construction Executive’s “Top 50 Construction Law Firms™”

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

    Wendel Rosen Attorneys Named as Fellows of the Construction Lawyers Society of America

    5 Ways Equipment Financing is Empowering Small Construction Businesses

    Colorado “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and exclusions j(5) and j(6) “that particular part”

    Two-Part Series on Condominium Construction Defect Issues

    Following Mishaps, D.C. Metro Presses on With Repairs

    Avoiding Disaster Due to Improper Licensing

    Insured's Claim for Cyber Coverage Rejected

    Absence of Property Damage During Policy Period Equates to No Coverage

    Largest Dam Removal Program in US History Reaches Milestone

    Rent Increases During the Coronavirus Emergency Part II: Avoiding Violations Under California’s Anti-Price Gouging Statute

    Alleged Defective Water Pump Leads to 900K in Damages

    Privity Problems Continue for Additional Insureds in the Second Circuit

    Quick Note: Not In Contract With The Owner? Serve A Notice To Owner.

    Mitigating FCRA Risk Through Insurance

    Appellate Attorney’s Fees and the Significant Issues Test

    “Based On”… What Exactly? NJ Appellate Division Examines Phrase and Estops Insurer From Disclaiming Coverage for 20-Month Delay

    Prime Contractor & Surety’s Recovery of Attorney’s Fees in Miller Act Lawsuit

    Meet Daniel Hall, Assistant Professor at TU Delft

    Scope of Products Requiring Proposition 65 Warnings in California Poised to Grow

    Structural Engineer Claims Reinforcement Was Never Installed on Troubled NYC Tower

    Condo Board May Be Negligent for not Filing Construction Defect Suit in a Timely Fashion

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Wrap Music to an Insurer’s Ears?”

    Miller Act CLAIMS: Finding Protections and Preserving Your Rights

    California Homeowners Can Release Future, Unknown Claims Against Builders

    Illinois Supreme Court Limits Reach of Implied Warranty Claims Against Contractors

    Brian Newberry Accepted into ABOTA

    In Phoenix, Crews Thread Needle With $730M Broadway Curve Revamp

    Update Your California Release Provisions to Include Amended Section 1542 Language

    A General Contractor’s Guide to Additional Insured Coverage

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2019

    Ninth Circuit Clears the Way for Review of Oregon District Court’s Rulings in Controversial Climate Change Case

    Encinitas Office Obtains Complete Defense Verdict Including Attorney Fees and Costs After Ten Day Construction Arbitration

    Eastern District of Pennsylvania Clarifies Standard for Imposing Spoliation Sanctions

    Constructive Changes – A Primer

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

    Slow Down?

    Kamran Salour Named to Los Angeles Times' 2026 Legal Visionaries List

    The “Ugly” Property Next Door is Ruining My Property Value

    South Carolina Homeowners May Finally Get Class Action for Stucco Defects
    Corporate Profile

    HEBO OREGON CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Through more than four thousand construction, architectural, and engineering related expert designations, the Hebo, Oregon Construction Expert Directory provides a wide range of trial support and construction consulting services to builders and construction claims professionals concerned with construction defect, scheduling, and delay matters. BHA provides construction claims evaluation, testimony, and 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 assets which include testifying architects, design engineers, construction cost and standard of care experts, the organization brings national experience and local capabilities to Hebo and the surrounding areas.

    Hebo Oregon slope failure expert witnessHebo Oregon stucco expert witnessHebo Oregon engineering consultantHebo Oregon architect expert witnessHebo Oregon construction expert witness public projectsHebo Oregon construction forensic expert witnessHebo Oregon building envelope expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Hebo, Oregon

    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

    Trial-Tested Property Litigator Kimberlee Martin Joins Ball Janik LLP's Orlando Construction Defect Team

    October 06, 2026 —
    ORLANDO, FL, September 30, 2026 — Ball Janik LLP has added Kimberlee A. Martin to its Construction Defect Practice Group as an associate in the firm's Orlando office. For more than a decade, she has litigated matters in the fields of criminal defense, first-party property, and insurance disputes, taking cases and claims from inception through jury trial. It's the same path many of Ball Janik's clients face when construction goes wrong, and her arrival deepens the firm's trial bench in Central Florida. "Florida property owners are dealing with complex building problems and less time to act on them. That puts a premium on attorneys who can take a case the distance," said James C. Prichard, Managing Partner of Ball Janik LLP. "Kimberlee has carried property and insurance claims from pre-suit all the way through trial, working hand in hand with experts along the way. Community associations and commercial property owners need exactly that combination, and she brings it to our team on day one." Most recently, Kimberlee served as Litigation Director, where she oversaw homeowners' property claims in pre-suit and litigation, managed a substantial caseload, and guided associate attorneys on litigation strategy. Her civil work includes jury trials, summary judgment and dismissal motions, expert and witness depositions, mediations, and site inspections, along with close coordination with contractors, consultants, and other experts. That skill set maps directly onto construction defect and insurance recovery litigation, where cases often turn on site evidence, expert testimony, and a credible readiness to go to trial. "I've seen firsthand how much is at stake when a building has problems: owners' investments, residents' homes, and everyone's peace of mind," said Kimberlee. "Ball Janik is focused on exactly those clients, which made this a natural next step for my practice. I'm excited to join this team and help property owners hold the responsible parties accountable and get their buildings repaired." Kimberlee earned her J.D., cum laude, from Florida International University College of Law and her B.A. in political science, with a minor in legal studies, from the University of Central Florida. About Ball Janik LLP Ball Janik LLP is a Florida-based law firm offering construction defect, construction law, insurance recovery, and commercial litigation counsel, to its local and national clients. The firm was founded in 1982 and has expanded its capabilities, professionals, and geographic footprint. What started as a small firm focused on real property, land use, and litigation (known then as Ball Janik & Novack) has grown to a team of 70-plus attorneys and paralegals in five offices in Florida, with centuries of combined experience and capabilities. The firm has been recognized by Chambers USA, including for its construction law capabilities in Florida, U.S. News & World Report and Best Lawyers®, The Best Lawyers in America©, Super Lawyers, and Corporate International. Read more at www.balljanik.com.

    Project Labor Agreements: A New Bid Protest Forum Split

    May 14, 2026 —
    Advertisements often include a disclaimer: “individual results may vary.” Similarly, lawyers are notorious for saying “it depends.” The mandatory Project Labor Agreement (“PLA”) regulations have recently placed into context this adage as it applies to federal contract bid protests, with very different results depending on which forum – the Court of Federal Claims (“COFC”) versus the Government Accountability Office (“GAO”) – different contractors have selected to bring PLA bid protests. Over the last two years, over 30 protesters have successfully achieved removal of mandatory PLAs from large-scale federal construction contracts based on two landmark bid protest decisions issued by the COFC. Similar challenges to PLAs at the GAO, however, have not been successful in removing PLAs, highlighting an emerging trend that the COFC is often a more effective relief forum than GAO for government construction contractors. Reprinted courtesy of Dirk D. Haire, Burr & Forman LLP, David P.J. Timm, Burr & Forman LLP and Michael J. Brewer, Burr & Forman LLP Mr. Haire may be contacted at dhaire@burr.com Mr. Timm may be contacted at dtimm@burr.com Mr. Brewer may be contacted at mbrewer@burr.com Read the full story...

    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...

    Not Every Job Is Worth Winning: Contract Risk Questions Contractors Should Ask Before They Bid

    September 29, 2026 —
    Introduction Winning the work is not the same as winning the project, at least financially. Consider a contractor that commits to procure custom or long-lead materials before receiving complete construction documents. Depending on the language of the contract, if the final design is altered after those materials have been ordered, the contractor may be left responsible for replacement costs, procurement delays, or both. Alternatively, a subcontractor that accepts a pay-if-paid provision without investigating the owner’s financing, or prematurely waives lien rights, potentially risks nonpayment for properly performed work. Such concessions can quickly transform an apparently profitable project into a significant financial burden. A successful bid can therefore become an unsuccessful project if the contractor accepts contractual “red flags” without evaluating their consequences and the long-term financial impacts that they may have. The significance of each risk will depend on the project, the parties, the proposed contract, applicable law, and the contractor’s business objectives. Although not comprehensive, this article identifies several key considerations for that process to help mitigate certain risks. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jack Mayo, Jones Walker LLP
    Mr. Mayo may be contacted at jmayo@joneswalker.com

    How AEC Firms Move AI Beyond the Pilot

    July 27, 2026 —
    Most AEC firms can run an AI pilot, but few can scale it. Enthusiasm for a first experiment rarely extends beyond the pilot team, leaving the pilot as an isolated win that never changes how the company works. In a recent AEC Business Podcast episode, Adeline Chan, CEO and co-founder of Hong Kong-based AAL Innovation, explained why that gap exists and what separates the firms that close it from those that stall. The Pilot Mindset that Holds Construction Back Adeline draws a sharp contrast between finance and construction. Banks cannot afford to fall behind their competitors, so they pilot constantly, sometimes running hundreds of proof-of-concept teams in parallel and letting them compete internally to identify the approach that works. The winning concept becomes the standard and scales across the organization, and the return on investment is measured in undeniable numbers. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Judge's Order Halts Google Data Center Project in Minnesota

    July 27, 2026 —
    Construction of a $1-billion Google data center planned by Ryan Cos. on 485 acres in southeastern Minnesota was expected to start in July but is now halted under a judge’s order. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Annemarie Mannion, Engineering News-Record
    Ms. Mannion may be contacted at manniona@enr.com

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s Orange County Team for Securing a Strong MSJ Result in a Residential Gas Explosion Matter!

    May 14, 2026 —
    Huge Congratulations to Partner Kevin Wheeler and Associate Lindsey Wells for securing a strong result on a Motion for Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication filed on behalf of their client, the City of Murrieta. This was a complex, multi-party matter arising from a residential gas leak and explosion, where Plaintiffs alleged the City and MFPD failed to properly respond to the incident. After multiple complaints were consolidated and extensive defense work narrowed the case, eighteen plaintiffs remained asserting five causes of action against the City, prompting a comprehensive MSJ/MSA targeting liability, causation, and damages. The Court’s ruling reflects a significant win, particularly on the immunity framework. The Court eliminated the core negligence and assumed-duty claims arising from fire protection and emergency response activities. It further disposed of the misrepresentation and public nuisance claims. At the end of the day, three plaintiffs were dismissed entirely for failure to comply with Government Claims Act requirements, further reducing the scope of the case. While the dangerous condition claim remains, it does so in a very limited posture. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP