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

    Washington Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: (SB 5536) The legislature passed a contractor protection bill that reduces contractors' exposure to lawsuits to six years from 12, and gives builders seven "affirmative defenses" to counter defect complaints from homeowners. Claimant must provide notice no later than 45 days before filing action; within 21 days of notice of claim, "construction professional" must serve response; claimant must accept or reject inspection proposal or settlement offer within 30 days; within 14 days following inspection, construction pro must serve written offer to remedy/compromise/settle; claimant can reject all offers; statutes of limitations are tolled until 60 days after period of time during which filing of action is barred under section 3 of the act. This law applies to single-family dwellings and condos.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Elk Washington

    A license is required for plumbing, and electrical trades. Businesses must register with the Secretary of State.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Jefferson County Home Builders Association
    Local # 4947
    PO Box 1399
    Port Hadlock, WA 98339
    http://www.jeffcohomebuilders.com

    North Peninsula Builders Association
    Local # 4927
    PO Box 748
    Port Angeles, WA 98362


    Home Builders Association of Spokane
    Local # 4966
    5813 E 4th Ave Ste 201
    Spokane, WA 99212
    http://www.shba.com

    MBuilders Association of King & Snohomish Counties
    Local # 4955
    335 116th Ave SE
    Bellevue, WA 98004
    http://www.masterbuildersinfo.com

    Home Builders Association of Kitsap County
    Local # 4944
    5251 Auto Ctr Way
    Bremerton, WA 98312
    http://www.kitsaphba.com

    Skagit-Island Counties Builders Association
    Local # 4960
    15571-A Peterson Rd
    Burlington, WA 98233
    http://www.sicba.org

    Home Builders Association of North Central
    Local # 4957
    PO Box 2065
    Wenatchee, WA 98801
    http://www.nchba.cc


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Elk Washington

    Consider Manner In Which Loan Agreement (Promissory Note) Is Drafted

    Property Owner Found Liable for Injuries to Worker of Unlicensed Contractor, Again

    The Coverage Fun House Mirror: When Things Are Not What They Seem

    Benefit of the Coblentz Agreement and Consent Judgment

    Confidence Among U.S. Homebuilders Little Changed in January

    How AB5 has Changed the Employment Landscape

    Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC Recognized Among The Top 50 Construction Law Firms TM of 2024 by Construction Executive

    San Francisco Airport’s Terminal 1 Aims Sky High

    “He Chose…Poorly: How Bad DSC Clauses Lead to Project Doom in the Last Crusade of Construction Risk”

    Hawaii Supreme Court Finds Subcontractor Has No Duty to Defend Under Indemnity Provision

    Render Unto Caesar: Considerations for Returning Withheld Sums

    Doctrine of Merger Not a Good Blend for Seller of Sonoma Winery Property

    Homeowner Loses Suit against Architect and Contractor of Resold Home

    Statutes of Limitations May be the Colorado Contractors’ Friend

    Performance Bonds: Follow the Letter of the Bond and Keep The Surety Informed

    Hunton Insurance Team Wins Summary Judgment on Firm’s Own Hurricane Harvey Business Income Loss

    What Contractors Can Do to Address Rising Material Costs

    Scaffolding Purchase Suggests No New Building for Board of Equalization

    The Importance of the Subcontractor Exception to the “Your Work” Exclusion

    EPA Issues Interpretive Statement on Application of NPDES Permit System to Releases of Pollutants to Groundwater

    Residential Construction: Shrinking Now, Growing Later?

    Florida Supreme Court Adopts Federal Summary Judgment Standard, Substantially Conforming Florida’s Rule 1.510 to Federal Rule 56

    No Coverage Where Cracks in Basement Walls Do Not Amount to Sudden Collapse

    We Knew Concrete Could Absorb Carbon—New Study Tells How Much

    Tennessee Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C" Grade

    Update to Washington State Covid-19 Guidance

    Agree First or it May Cost You Later

    Undercover Sting Nabs Eleven Illegal Contractors in California

    Apartment Construction Ominously Nears 25-Year High

    Power to the Office Worker

    Conversations with My Younger Self: 5 Things I Wish I Knew Then

    U.S. Supreme Court Allows Climate Change Lawsuits to Proceed in State Court

    Hawaii Court Finds No Bad Faith, But Negligent Misrepresentation Claim Survives Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Action

    Dangerous Condition, Dangerous Precedent: California Supreme Court Expands Scope of Dangerous Condition Liability Involving Third Party Negligent/Criminal Conduct

    ASCE Statement on Calls to Suspend the Federal Gas Tax

    Another Las Vegas Tower at the Center of Construction Defect Claims

    10 Safety Tips for General Contractors

    The “Your Work” Exclusion—Is there a Trend against Coverage?

    Damron Agreement Questioned in Colorado Casualty Insurance v Safety Control Company, et al.

    Updated 3/13/20: Coronavirus is Here: What Does That Mean for Your Project and Your Business?

    Two Injured in Walkway Collapse of Detroit Apartment Complex

    New Jersey Supreme Court Ruled Condo Association Can’t Reset Clock on Construction Defect Claim

    Court of Appeals Confirms that King County Superior Court’s Jury Selection Process Satisfies Due Process Requirements

    Affirmed: Nationwide Acted in Bad Faith by Failing to Settle Within Limits

    Court of Appeal Puts the “Equity” in Equitable Subrogation

    More Musings From the Mediation Trenches

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (4/10/24) – Hotels Integrate AI, Baby-Boomers Stay Put, and Insurance Affects Housing Market

    Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion on Business Risk Exclusions Fails

    Quick Note: Don’t Forget To Serve The Contractor Final Payment Affidavit

    Construction Law Alert: Concrete Supplier Botches Concrete Mix, Gets Thrashed By Court of Appeal for Trying to Blame Third Party
    Corporate Profile

    ELK WASHINGTON CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from approximately five thousand building and claims related expert witness designations, the Elk, Washington Construction Expert Directory provides a single point of reference for construction defect and claims related support to attorneys and construction practice groups seeking effective resolution of construction defect, scheduling, and delay matters. BHA provides construction related consulting and expert witness support services to widely recognized construction practice groups, Fortune 500 builders, CGL carriers, owners, as well as a variety of public entities. Utilizing in house resources which comprise credentialed construction consultants, NCARB certified architects, forensic engineers, building envelope and design experts, the firm brings regional experience and local capabilities to Elk and the surrounding areas.

    Elk Washington multi family design expert witnessElk Washington reconstruction expert witnessElk Washington construction expert witness public projectsElk Washington consulting general contractorElk Washington OSHA expert witness constructionElk Washington construction expert witnessElk Washington construction project management expert witnesses
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Elk, Washington

    Celebrating BWB&O’s 2026 Super Lawyers Rising Stars in San Diego!

    March 31, 2026 —
    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP is proud to announce that Partners Jocelyn Russo, Christina Matian, and Associate Angelo Perillo have been named to the Super Lawyers 2026 San Diego Rising Stars list. This recognition highlights their outstanding dedication and distinguished service in Family Law, Civil Litigation, and Personal Injury Litigation.
    SUPER LAWYERS Jocelyn Russo: 2023-2026 Christina Matian: 2024-2026 Angelo Perillo: 2024-2026
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP

    Quick Note: Include Key Time Related Facts in Contract to Avoid an Ambiguity

    February 17, 2026 —
    When drafting or negotiating a contract, it is important to consider key time-related facts. In other words, if there are important provisions dealing with time, you don’t want to leave them undefined as that can create an ambiguity in the contract. In a recent case dealing with an investment contract, discussed here, that’s exactly what happened. The contract allowed investors to exercise an option to return their equity in exchange for a refund of their investment but the contract didn’t contain an expiration date on when the option must be exercised. The investors tried to exercise the option two years later leading to a dispute as to whether that was a “reasonable time.” This is because the lack of clarity regarding this temporal fact led to a latent ambiguity meaning it was a question of fact as to whether the investors exercising the option two years later was reasonable under the circumstances. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (3/11/25) – An AI Inflection Point for Hotels, Investor Pivot in Build-to-Rent and Looming Legislation for Single-Family Investors

    March 24, 2026 —
    In our latest roundup, lodging demand for World Cup brings growth, commercial property management firms use of AI becomes firmer, construction industry shows slow start to the year, and more! Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    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...

    Kahana Feld Obtains Favorable Result in High-Exposure NY Premises Liability Case

    June 15, 2026 —
    Kahana Feld partner Leigh Katz obtained a significant victory in a recent matter involving a videotaped alleged trip and fall on the sidewalk in front of the client’s commercial residence. The plaintiff claimed he suffered a knee injury that necessitated surgery, along with other assorted injuries that prevented him from continuing high-level athletic activities. Leigh was able to demonstrate that the fall was staged and received a voluntary discontinuance with prejudice. At mediation, Leigh emphasized that KF’s expert witness challenged the plaintiff’s claim that the fall was caused by a sidewalk height differential after reviewing the videotape footage and determining the plaintiff’s fall began before his feet made contact with the alleged defect. Based on this analysis, the expert concluded the reported height differential did not initiate the fall, which supported KF’s position that the incident depicted in the video was unrealistic and appeared staged. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Leigh Katz, Kahana Feld
    Ms. Katz may be contacted at lkatz@kahanafeld.com

    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

    Georgia HB 676: A Bill Property Owners and Contractors Should Watch

    March 24, 2026 —
    Property owners, contractors, and others dealing with mechanics and materialmen’s liens in Georgia should keep an eye on HB 676, which is currently making its way through the Georgia General Assembly. The bill aims to curb misuse of the lien process and provide additional remedies to those challenging a frivolous lien filing. What HB 676 Would Do HB 676 would add a new Code section (O.C.G.A. § 44-14-366.6) to the mechanics and materialmen’s lien statutes. If a lien is filed “without substantial justification or that is not made in good faith or that is made with malice or a wrongful purpose,” this new Code section would impose a fine of $1,500 per lien on the lien claimant, in addition to any attorney’s fees or court costs incurred by the party challenging the lien. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Robert Lafayette, Seyfarth Shaw LLP
    Mr. Lafayette may be contacted at rlafayette@seyfarth.com

    UPDATED: Dominion Sues Feds Over Offshore Wind Project Halt, With Action Possible on Others Shut

    February 02, 2026 —
    UPDATED: Dominion Energy filed a federal lawsuit Dec. 23 in Norfolk, Va. against the U.S. Interior Dept. immediate construction pause order for its 2.6-GW Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind energy project (CVOW) off Virginia Beach, Va., which it developing to begin operation next year. The project is one of five large East Coast offshore wind projects under construction that the federal agency paused, claiming new "national security" risks. Dominion and OSW Project LLC, the entity that includes project co-owner Stonepeak Partners, a private investor, said they seek a temporary restraining order. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Debra K. Rubin, Engineering News-Record
    Ms. Rubin may be contacted at rubind@enr.com