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

    Wisconsin Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: SB448 specifies 90 day notice with details and evidence prior to commencing legal action. It provides for a 15 day written response from contractor or 25 days if cross-claims against subcontractors; The law states “The claimant and contractor or supplier are bound by any contractor or supplier warranty terms pertaining to products or services supplied for the dwelling.”


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Cedar Grove Wisconsin

    Contractors are required to have the correct credentials for their trade. Not all classifications require credentialing. For a list of credentials, see the website.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Mid Wisconsin Home Builders Association
    Local # 5181
    PO Box 865
    Portage, WI 53901
    http://www.mwhba.org/

    Sheboygan Cty Home Builders Association
    Local # 5159
    435 E Mill Street
    Plymouth, WI 53073
    http://www.schba.org

    Home Builders Association of Fond Du Lac & Dodge Cos
    Local # 5116
    490 W Rolling Meadows Dr
    Fond Du Lac, WI 54937
    http://www.homebuildersfdldodge.com

    La Crosse Area Builders Association
    Local # 5126
    816 2nd Ave S
    Onalaska, WI 54650
    http://www.labaonline.com

    Mid-Shore Home Builders Association Affil w/National Associated Home Builders
    Local # 5150
    PO Box 125 2104 Mary Ave
    New Holstein, WI 53061
    http://midshoreshomebuilders.com

    Wisconsin Builders Association (State)
    Local # 5100
    4868 High Crossing Blvd
    Madison, WI 53704
    http://www.wisbuild.org

    Winnebago Home Builders Association
    Local # 5190
    4041 State Road 91 Suite A
    Oshkosh, WI 54904
    http://www.whba.net


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Cedar Grove Wisconsin

    Colorado Appeals Court Clarifies “Control” Exception to Statute of Repose

    Entire Fairness or Business Judgment? It’s Anyone’s Guess

    Why the Total Recordable Incident Rate Doesn’t Tell the Whole Safety Story

    Montana Federal Court Upholds Application of Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause

    A New Perspective on Mapping Construction Sites with the Crane Camera System

    Whitney Stefko Named to ENR’s Top Young Professionals, formerly ENR’s Top 20 Under 40, in California

    CAPSA Changes Now in Effect

    The Metaphysics of When an Accident is an “Accident” (or Not) Under Your Insurance Policy

    Arizona Supreme Court Clarifies Area Variance Standard; Property Owners May Obtain an Area Variance When Special Circumstances Existed at Purchase

    Illinois Favors Finding Construction Defects as an Occurrence

    Google’s Floating Mystery Boxes Solved?

    Eleventh Circuit Finds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Claims

    Insurance Policy Provides No Coverage For Slab Collapse in Vision One

    South Carolina “occurrence” and allocation

    Duty to Defend Requires Payments Under Policy's Supplemental Payments Provision

    Ensuring Efficient Arbitration of Construction Disputes Involving Mechanic’s Liens

    Mediation Clause Can Stay a Miller Act Claim, Just Not Forever

    Court Bars Licensed Contractor From Seeking Compensation for Work Performed by Unlicensed Sub

    Coverage Article - To Settle or Not To Settle?

    Indemnification Against Release/“Disposal” of Hazardous Materials

    The Biggest Change to the Mechanics Lien Law Since 1963

    Boston Tower Project to Create 450 Jobs

    When is a Contract not a Contract?

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

    Jinx: Third Circuit Rules in Favor of Teamsters in Withdrawal Case

    Shoring of Ceiling Does Not Constitute Collapse Under Policy's Definition

    Contractor Covered for Voluntary Remediation Efforts in Completed Homes

    Don’t Spoil Me: Oklahoma District Court Rules Against Spoliation Sanctions

    Red Tape Is Holding Up a Greener Future

    Insurance Firm Defends against $22 Million Claim

    California Contractor Tests the Bounds of Job Order Contracting

    Excess Carrier's Declaratory Judgment Action Stayed While Underlying Case Still Pending

    Adjuster's Report No Substitute for Proof of Loss Under Flood Policy

    Lithium for Batteries from Geothermal Brine

    What if the Supreme Court Overrules the Reciprocal Tariffs? Plan Now for Refunds, Protests, and Contract Reconciliation

    Skyline Cockpit’s Game-Changing Tower Crane Teleoperation

    Governor Ducey Vetoes Water and Development Bills

    Construction Estimation: From Manual Takeoff to the AI Future

    Waiver Of Arbitration by Not Submitting Claim to Initial Decision Maker…Really!

    Pending Sales of U.S. Existing Homes Rise Most in Four Years

    Wilke Fleury ranked in Best Lawyers’ Best Law Firms!!

    Hollywood Legend Betty Grable’s Former Home for Sale

    Injured Construction Worker Settles for Five Hundred Thousand

    Get Creative to Solve Your Construction Company's Staffing Challenges

    Implied Warranties for Infrastructure in Florida Construction Defect Claims

    DC Circuit Rejects Challenge to EPA’s CERCLA Decision Regarding Hardrock Mining Industry

    New Jersey Courts Sign "Death Knell" for 1979 Weedo Decision

    In Florida, Component Parts of an Improvement to Real Property are Subject to the Statute of Repose for Products Liability Claims

    Miller Act Payment Bond Surety Bound to Arbitration Award

    The Real Estate Crisis in North Dakota's Man Camps
    Corporate Profile

    CEDAR GROVE WISCONSIN CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Through over 4500 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Cedar Grove, Wisconsin Construction Expert Directory delivers a superior construction and design expert support solution to builders, risk managers, and construction practice groups concerned with construction defect, scheduling, and delay claims. BHA provides building related consulting and expert witness support services to the nation's most recognized construction practice groups, public builders, risk managers, owners, state and local government agencies. Utilizing captive resources which comprise licensed architects, registered professional engineers, ASPE certified professional estimators, ICC Certified inspection and testing professionals, the firm brings national experience and local capabilities to Cedar Grove and the surrounding areas.

    Cedar Grove Wisconsin expert witnesses fenestrationCedar Grove Wisconsin consulting engineersCedar Grove Wisconsin expert witness structural engineerCedar Grove Wisconsin construction expert witness public projectsCedar Grove Wisconsin fenestration expert witnessCedar Grove Wisconsin engineering expert witnessCedar Grove Wisconsin expert witness concrete failure
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Cedar Grove, Wisconsin

    PSA: Getting the First Mechanic’s Lien on a Project is a Plus

    January 26, 2026 —
    As those that read this construction law blog are aware, I am a big fan of mechanic’s liens as a way to get paid. These powerful and tricky beasts are a great way to get an owner’s attention and to put payment pressure on those that owe you money. Recently I was reminded that getting a lien prepared and recorded both carefully and quickly can be key to getting paid on a problem project. Not only should construction professionals keep the 150-day rule and the 90-day rule in mind, but they should also be quick on the trigger when it becomes clear that a mechanic’s lien will be necessary. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    When Rule 702 Motions Fail: A Close Look at AECOM v. Flatiron

    February 02, 2026 —
    In AECOM Tech. Servs., Inc. v. Flatiron | AECOM, LLC, 2024 WL 22640 (D. Colo. 2024), the United States District Court for the District of Colorado addressed when expert testimony is not subject to be limited or excluded pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 702. Background In 2015, AECOM Technical Services, Inc. (“AECOM”) and Flatiron | AECOM, LLC (“Flatiron”) entered into an agreement, in which they agreed to work together to assemble a design/build team for the purposes of submitting a proposal to the Colorado Department of Transportation’s (“CDOT”) construction project known as C-470 Tolled Express Lanes Segment 1 Design-Build Project (the “Project”). AECOM provided the design and engineering services, and Flatiron submitted the proposal to CDOT. On or about June 16, 2016, CDOT awarded Flatiron the Project. Flatiron later claimed that AECOM’s design failed to follow basic engineering and project requirements. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC

    Fort Lauderdale Associate Secures Summary Judgment in Rare Premises Liability Win

    February 23, 2026 —
    Fort Lauderdale associate Kyle Hollander recently secured a summary judgment victory for his client, Winn-Dixie, in a contested premises liability case. This was a hotly disputed liability case of water on the floor near an ice cooler with surveillance footage of a customer constantly bringing bags of ice to and from the cooler to the register. The plaintiff unknowingly stepped into the area of dripped melted ice and fell. Kyle successfully argued based on the plaintiff’s own deposition testimony and the surveillance footage that Winn-Dixie didn’t have the requisite actual notice. Additionally, Kyle argued that the brief duration the condition remained on the floor was legally insufficient to establish constructive notice under Florida law. The Court agreed, finding that the evidence would not survive a directed verdict and granting summary judgment in favor of the defense. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Under Construction – November 2025

    January 06, 2026 —
    Letter From the Editor Welcome to the fall edition of Snell & Wilmer’s Under Construction Newsletter. As brisk autumn air sets in, it’s an ideal moment to shore up the basics — both in your projects and in your grasp of the continually shifting field of construction law. In this newsletter, we explore a variety of topics related to current construction trends and legal news that may be relevant and helpful to you and your business. We have assembled a selection of articles that include discussions of state-specific issues including how Idaho’s Contractor Registration Act bars unregistering contractors from enforcing contracts or filing liens, though the state Supreme Court allows remedies for post-registration work if severable. This edition discusses how contractors can maximize cash flow and profits by substituting security for retainage on public projects. We also highlight the California Court of Appeals discussion and latest decision relating to subcontractor substitution protections under Public Contract Code §4107. We round out our newsletter summarizing how the Colorado Supreme Court clarified that the economic loss rule bars tort claims for purely economic harm arising from contracts — even when alleging willful and wanton misconduct. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Snell & Wilmer

    Call Me Maybe: California’s Fair Claims Settlement Practices Regulations

    November 04, 2025 —
    It’s not uncommon in construction claims for there to be Insurance and bond issues, whether it’s tendering a claim to your insurer, or claims against a license, payment, or performance bond. Insurance Code section 790.03 sets forth sixteen (16) unfair claims settlement practices by insurers and sureties including:
    1. Misrepresenting to claimants pertinent facts or insurance policy provisions relating to any coverages at issue.
    2. Failing to acknowledge and act reasonably promptly upon communications with respect to claims arising under insurance policies.
    3. Failing to adopt and implement reasonable standards for the prompt investigation and processing of claims arising under insurance policies.
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Seven Kahana Feld Attorneys Selected to 2025 New York Metro Super Lawyers Lists

    November 18, 2025 —
    NEW YORK - Oct. 30, 2025 - Kahana Feld is pleased to announce that Tim Capowski was included in the 2025 edition of New York Metro Super Lawyers and Sean Harriton, Rachael Marvin, Sarah Pavlini, Mariah Smith, Christopher Theobalt, and Sofya Uvaydov were included in New York Metro Rising Stars. 2025 New York Metro Super Lawyers Tim Capowski was awarded for his work in Appellate Law. Capowski is a partner at Kahana Feld and chair of the firm’s National Appellate Litigation & Consulting Group. He has spent the better part of three decades at the forefront of the insurance defense bar. He has litigated hundreds of appeals and thousands of motions in state and federal and appellate courts throughout New York and around the country. He handles a variety of complex litigation including catastrophic property and casualty claims, construction defect, professional liability, labor and employment law, mass torts, insurance coverage, and more. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Eva Paulson, Kahana Feld
    Ms. Paulson may be contacted at epaulson@kahanafeld.com

    Navigating Turbulent Waters Ashore: Insurance Lessons from a Navy Project Dispute

    February 02, 2026 —
    As we ring in the New Year, one thing remains the same: understanding the definitions and conditions in your insurance policy is critical. In a recent decision, a Florida federal court in Ohio Security Insurance Co. v. E Kelly Enterprises Inc. et al., No. 3:22-cv-24754, held that an insurer had no duty to defend or indemnify a general contractor and no duty to indemnify a subcontractor for damages from defective work on a naval base, based on the policy’s definition of “suit,” “property damage,” and allocation requirements. The decision highlights the importance of numerous issues in the context of commercial general liability policies, including the nuances of policy definitions, obtaining insurer consent when necessary, and allocation between covered and uncovered claims. Background In October 2014, a general contractor (“GC”) was awarded a contract by the Navy to renovate buildings at the Naval Air Station in Pensacola. The GC subcontracted work to various subcontractors, including metal framing and drywall, to a subcontractor named EKE. Reprinted courtesy of Cary D. Steklof, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP and Torrye Zullo, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP Mr. Steklof may be contacted at csteklof@hunton.com Ms. Zullo may be contacted at tzullo@hunton.com Read the full story...

    Damage from Frozen Pipes Excluded from Coverage

    March 31, 2026 —
    Applying Texas law, the federal district court found there was no coverage for damage to the insured’s commercial building due to the bursting of frozen pipes. Barona v. State Farm Lloyds, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 257379 (S.D. Texas Dec. 12, 2025). Freezing weather froze Barona’s plumbing fixtures, causing significant water damage to the commercial property when the plumbing eventually expanded and burst. State Farm sent an inspector. During the inspection, Barona stated that he turned off the heat to his building but did not shut off the water supply or drain the pipes. State Farm denied covered based on the policy’s exclusion for frozen plumbing. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com