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

    Pennsylvania Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: HB 1875 stipulates that “no later than 90 days before filing an action, serve written notice of claim on the contractor. Upon receipt of notice, builder has 15 days to forward the claim to any subcontractor/supplier and 30 days after service of notice to offer to compromise and settle the claim by monetary payment without inspection, propose to inspect the dwelling that is the subject of the claim; or reject the claim. Contractor has 14 days after inspection to provide written notice of intention.”


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Lawn Pennsylvania

    No state license required. For public works projects, see General Services website.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Pennsylvania Builders Association
    Local # 3900
    600 N 12th St
    Lemoyne, PA 17043
    http://www.pabuilders.org

    Home Builders Association of Bucks & Montgomery Counties
    Local # 3945
    721 Dresher Road Suite 1200
    Horsham, PA 19044
    http://www.hbahomes.com

    Washington Co Builders Association
    Local # 3964
    30 E Beau St Room #321
    Washington, PA 15301
    http://www.wcbabuilders.org

    Lebanon County Bldrs Assn
    Local # 3938
    39 Klein Avenue
    Lebanon, PA 17042
    http://www.lebcobuilders.com

    Home Builders Association of the Alleghenies
    Local # 3928
    1397 Eisenhower Blvd Suite 201
    Johnstown, PA 15904
    http://www.hbaahomes.org

    Home Builders Association of Metropolitan Harrisburg
    Local # 3924
    2416 Park Drive
    Harrisburg, PA 17110
    http://www.harrisburgbuilders.com

    Home Builders Association of Berks County
    Local # 3948
    25 Stevens Ave
    West Lawn, PA 19609
    http://www.hbaberks.org


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Lawn Pennsylvania

    Ahead of the Storm: Preparing for Irma

    Federal Court Opinion Has Huge Impact on the Construction Industry

    Homebuilders Opposed to Potential Change to Interest on Construction Defect Expenses

    The Texas Supreme Court Limits the Use of the Economic Loss Rule

    UConn’s Law-School Library Construction Case Settled for Millions

    Cooperation and Collaboration With Government May Be on the Horizon

    Colorado Abandons the “Completed and Accepted Rule” in Favor of the “Foreseeability Rule” in Determining a Contractor’s Duty to a Third Party After Work Has Been Completed

    Insurer's Attempt to Limit Additional Insured Status Fails

    Fourth Circuit Extends Coverage to Contractor

    Will COVID-19 Permanently Shift the Balance between Work from Home and the Workplace?

    GRSM Attorneys Selected to 2025 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars Lists

    Pennsylvania Homeowner Blames Cracks on Chipolte Construction

    Certified Question Asks Washington Supreme Court Whether Insurer is Bound by Contradictory Certificate of Insurance

    You Are on Notice: Failure to Comply With Contractual Notice Provisions Can Be Fatal to Your Claim

    Municipal Ordinances Create Additional Opportunities for the Defense of Construction Defect Claims in Colorado

    Coverage Found for Faulty Workmanship Damaging Other Property

    A Downside of Associational Standing - HOA's Claims Against Subcontractors Barred by Statute of Limitations

    Builders Support Most of Bipartisan Housing Reform Bill in Congress

    New York Appellate Court Applies Broad Duty to Defend to Property Damage Case

    Illinois Legislature Enables Pre-Judgment Interest in Personal Injury Cases

    What Are The Most Commonly Claimed Issues In Construction Defect Litigation?

    New York Court Permits Asbestos Claimants to Proceed Against Insurers with Buyout Agreements

    Life After McMillin: Do Negligence and Strict Liability Causes of Action for Construction Defects Still Exist?

    Turner Construction Selected for Anaheim Convention Center Expansion Project

    Brandy Price, Dean Pillarella Named to Lawdragon's "Next Generation" List

    New York Appellate Court Restores Insurer’s Right to Seek Pro Rata Allocation of Settlements Between Insured and Uninsured Periods

    Florida “Property Damage” caused by an “Occurrence” and “Your Work” Exclusion

    Bought a New Vacation Home? I’m So Sorry

    Environmental and Regulatory Law Update: New Federal and State Rulings

    How to Build Climate Change-Resilient Infrastructure

    Report to Congress Calls for Framework to Cut Post-Quake Recovery Time

    Three Firm Members Are Top 100 Super Lawyers & Ten Are Recognized As Super Lawyers Or Rising Stars In 2018

    Mechanic’s Liens- Big Exception

    Party Loses Additional Insured Argument by Improper Pleading

    Flood Coverage Denied Based on Failure to Submit Proof of Loss

    Update Regarding McMillin Albany LLC v. Super Ct.

    Federal Court Dismisses Coverage Action in Favor of Pending State Proceeding

    Understanding Entitlement to Delays and Proper Support

    Termination of Construction Contracts

    Certifying Claim Under Contract Disputes Act

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

    Court Affirms Summary Adjudication of Bad Faith Claim Where Expert Opinions Raised a Genuine Dispute

    Waiving Consequential Damages—What Could Go Wrong?

    FEMA Fire Management Assistance Granted for the French Fire

    Supreme Court Rejects “Wholly Groundless” Exception to Question of Arbitrability

    Rooftop Solar Leases Scaring Buyers When Homeowners Sell

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Highlighted | 2019 Northern California Super Lawyers

    Insurers Subrogating in Arkansas Must Expend Energy to Prove That Their Insureds Have Been Made Whole

    The Legal 500 U.S. 2024 Guide Names Peckar & Abramson a Top Tier Firm in Construction Law and Recognizes Nine Attorneys

    Texas Granted Primacy Over Class VI Carbon Storage Wells
    s From Lendlease for LA 'Graffiti Building' Suit Costs

    Tenants Underwater: Indiana Court of Appeals Upholds Privity Requirement for Property Damage Claims Against Contractors

    Arizona Court Cites California Courts to Determine Construction Defect Coverage is Time Barred

    Electrical Subcontractor Sues over Termination
    Corporate Profile

    LAWN PENNSYLVANIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Drawing from more than four thousand construction and design related expert witness designations, the Lawn, Pennsylvania Construction Expert Directory provides a single point of reference for construction defect and claims related support to construction claims professionals seeking effective resolution of construction defect and claims matters. BHA provides construction claims investigation and expert services to the nation's leading construction practice groups, Fortune 500 builders, general liability carriers, owners, as well as a variety of public entities. Employing in house assets which include testifying architects, design engineers, construction cost and standard of care experts, the firm brings national experience and local capabilities to Lawn and the surrounding areas.

    Lawn Pennsylvania construction claims expert witnessLawn Pennsylvania defective construction expertLawn Pennsylvania delay claim expert witnessLawn Pennsylvania civil engineering expert witnessLawn Pennsylvania expert witness concrete failureLawn Pennsylvania building consultant expertLawn Pennsylvania architectural expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Lawn, Pennsylvania

    Seventh Circuit, With an Assist From the Illinois Supreme Court, Finds That “Pollution Exclusion” Bars Coverage For Emissions Allowed Under Regulatory Permit

    April 20, 2026 —
    In Griffith Foods Int’l Inc. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA, 24-1217 & 24-1223 (7th Cir. Mar. 13, 2026), the Seventh Circuit addressed the meaning and scope of a pollution exclusion in a standard-form commercial general liability insurance policy for underlying injuries caused by ethylene oxide (EtO) emissions. The insurance dispute arose out of underlying tort litigation involving bodily injury claims, including cancer, allegedly caused by emissions of ethylene oxide over a 35-year period from 1984 through 2019 by Griffith Foods International and later Sterigenics U.S. The pollution exclusion at issue generally barred coverage for “bodily injury” arising out of the discharge, dispersal, release or escape of smoke, vapors, soot, fumes, acids, alkalis, toxic chemicals, or other irritants, contaminants or pollutants. Interpreting similar exclusions, the Illinois Supreme Court has previously held that the standard CGL pollution exclusion bars coverage for bodily injuries caused by traditional environmental pollution (essentially industrial emissions of pollutants), but not by more commonplace emissions (such as carbon monoxide from a residential furnace or excess chlorine in a backyard swimming pool). See American States Insurance Co. v. Koloms, 177 Ill. 2d 473 (Ill. 1997). In Griffith Foods, the District Court initially concluded that the pollution exclusion did not apply because the companies emitted EtO pursuant to a permit issued by the IEPA. The District Court reached this latter conclusion by applying Erie Insurance Exchange v. Imperial Marble Corp., 957 N.E.2d 1214 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011), an Illinois intermediate appellate court decision finding it ambiguous whether a CGL policy’s pollution exclusion barred coverage for emissions authorized by regulatory permit. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason Taylor, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Taylor may be contacted at jtaylor@tlsslaw.com

    Defend Now, Allocate Later? An Unresolved Tension in Colorado Construction Law

    August 16, 2026 —
    For decades, Colorado law has recognized an important distinction between the duty to defend and the duty to indemnify. The former ordinarily arises at the beginning of litigation; the latter generally cannot be determined until the underlying liability is known. That distinction makes intuitive sense. A defense that becomes due only after litigation concludes is not much of a defense. But Colorado’s construction anti-indemnity statute, C.R.S. § 13-21-111.5(6), raises an interesting question about how that familiar rule operates in construction disputes. The statute expressly regulates contractual obligations not only to indemnify, but also to insure and defend, and it reflects a legislative policy that construction businesses should bear financial responsibility for their own negligence. Those principles have developed along separate tracks. At some point, a Colorado appellate court may have to decide precisely how they fit together. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Your AEC Firm Has a Memory Problem. Here Is How to Fix It

    June 01, 2026 —
    AEC companies trying to operationalize AI often find they lack the data foundation on which to build. There may be an abundance of data hidden in documents, but you can’t reliably use it for AI. The lack of data quality was a key topic discussed at the AI in AEC 2026 conference. During the event, I met many experts working to solve this problem, including Pavlina Nikolova, Egnyte‘s EMEA AEC Practice Lead. The chat and her presentation highlighted the challenges and ways to overcome them. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Utah’s Emerging Framework for Responsible Data Center Development

    September 08, 2026 —
    Utah is establishing itself as one of the nation’s most attractive jurisdictions for large-scale data center development, with a structured, defensible regulatory pathway that gives developers and investors the clarity needed to deploy capital at scale. The cornerstone is Executive Order 2026-03, “Establishing a Higher Bar for Data Center Development in Utah,” signed by Governor Spencer J. Cox on May 29, 2026. The Executive Order creates an actionable compliance framework letting developers demonstrate stewardship across water, air quality, energy, wildlife, and community engagement – reducing regulatory and reputational risk. Recent enactments on energy self-supply and water rights operationalize these principles, while a few counties have adopted short-term local moratoria to update zoning; understanding how these interact with the state framework matters for site selection. Reprinted courtesy of Denise A. Dragoo, Snell & Wilmer and Josh Miller, Snell & Wilmer Ms. Dragoo may be contacted at ddragoo@swlaw.com Mr. Miller may be contacted at jmiller@swlaw.com Read the full story...

    GRSM Trial Team Holds Alameda County Asbestos Verdict to $900,000 Against $50 Million Demand

    July 27, 2026 —
    Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani Partners John Katerndahl and Vincent Gunter recently obtained an outstanding trial result for a manufacturer of asbestos-containing electrical cable, holding a jury verdict to $900,000 against a $50 million demand following an eight-week trial in Alameda County Superior Court, which is among the most challenging asbestos venues in the country. The GRSM team also included Associate Brandon Sanchez, on-site trial Paralegal Laura Vitanova, and Paralegal Kerrie Lease. The plaintiffs, the surviving spouse and four children of a former painter who died of mesothelioma, alleged that the decedent was exposed to asbestos from the company’s electrical cable during construction of a California nuclear power facility. GRSM’s client was the sole remaining defendant at trial. The plaintiffs asked the jury for $50 million and called 15 witnesses across their case-in-chief and rebuttal. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani

    Construction Attorneys: Contract Negotiation Strategy

    September 01, 2026 —
    Contract negotiation is where project expectations become enforceable business obligations. A reasonable bid can become a high-risk agreement when the final contract expands the scope, shortens notice periods, limits payment rights or transfers liability that was never included in the price. Construction attorneys help project leaders identify those consequences before execution. Their role is not to eliminate every risk or prolong negotiations. It is to determine which risks can be controlled, insured, priced, shared or rejected while preserving a workable deal. The financial stakes can be substantial. HKA's 2025 analysis of more than 2,200 distressed construction and engineering projects found that disputed costs averaged 33.4% of contract budgets. Scope changes affected more than 28% of the projects studied and remained the most common cause of conflict. In North America, the average dispute studied by Arcadis in 2024 had a value of $60.1 million and took 12.5 months to resolve. Reprinted courtesy of Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

    EPA Expands PFAS Reporting Requirements with Addition of New Chemical to Toxics Release Inventory, Published by Law360

    June 08, 2026 —
    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) addition of sodium perfluorohexanesulfonate (PFHxS-Na) to the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) introduces new federal reporting requirements for businesses that manufacture, process, or use the chemical. Because reporting obligations apply retroactively to the start of the year, affected facilities must quickly evaluate their compliance and recordkeeping practices. In a recent Law360 article, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani Senior Counsel, Ayodeji Ayolola, explains why PFHxS-Na was automatically added to the TRI, how the EPA’s public reporting system works, and which businesses may be affected by the new rule. The article also touches upon key compliance considerations, including supply chain reviews, reporting thresholds for chemicals of special concern, and preparation for public disclosure requirements. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani

    LA Scores Major Victory in a High-Exposure Premises Liability Action

    July 06, 2026 —
    Our firm is proud to announce a decisive defense victory obtained by Partner Daniel Crespo and Associate Lauren Landau for our client in a high-exposure premises liability action arising from a 2022 incident at an active school construction site in Perris, California. On March 10, 2026, the Riverside County Superior Court granted Summary Judgment in full for our client, dismissing all claims brought by Plaintiff, who alleged she tripped and fell over a curb while picking up her daughter from school and sustained ankle and wrist injuries as a result. Through meticulous preparation and the strategic use of construction plans, contractual documents, and onsite surveillance video evidence, our team demonstrated that our client had no ownership, possession, or control over the portion of the existing sidewalk where the incident occurred, with construction plans unambiguously designating the area as pre-existing concrete outside our client’s scope of work, and the Construction Services Agreement expressly reserving control over all existing site improvements to the school district. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP