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

    Alaska Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: HB151 limits the damages that can be awarded in a construction defect lawsuit to the actual cost of fixing the defect and other closely related costs such as reasonable temporary housing expenses during the repair of the defect, any reduction in market value cause by the defect, and reasonable and necessary attorney fees.

    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Fort Yukon Alaska

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required

    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Interior Alaska Builders Association
    Local # 0235
    938 Aspen Street
    Fairbanks, AK 99709

    Mat-Su Home Builders Association
    Local # 0230
    Wasilla, AK 99654

    Home Builders Association of Alaska
    Local # 0200
    8301 Schoon St Ste 200
    Anchorage, AK 99518

    Home Builders Association of Anchorage
    Local # 0215
    8301 Schoon St Ste 200
    Anchorage, AK 99518

    Kenai Peninsula Builders Association
    Local # 0233
    PO Box 1753
    Kenai, AK 99611

    Northern Southeast Alaska Building Industry Association
    Local # 0225
    9085 Glacier Highway Ste 202
    Juneau, AK 99801

    Southern Southeast Alaska Building Industry Association
    Local # 0240
    PO Box 6291
    Ketchikan, AK 99901

    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Fort Yukon Alaska

    Appellate Attorney’s Fees and the Significant Issues Test

    MGM Seeks to Demolish Harmon Towers

    A Word to the Wise: The AIA Revised Contract Documents Could Lead to New and Unanticipated Risks - Part II

    Cutting the Salt Out: Tips for Avoiding Union Salting Charges

    The Ghosts of Projects Past

    Homebuilders Leading U.S. Consumer Stocks: EcoPulse

    No Indemnity After Insured Settles Breach of Implied Warranty of Habitability Claims

    Contract Change #9: Owner’s Right to Carry Out the Work (law note)

    Homeowners Should Beware, Warn Home Builders

    Canada Cooler Housing Market Boosts Poloz’s Soft Landing

    Massachusetts Federal Court Holds No Coverage for Mold and Water Damage Claim

    Mobile Home Owners Not a Class in Drainage Lawsuit

    OSHA Extends Temporary Fall Protection Rules

    Colorado Construction-Defects Reform Law Attempt Expected in 2015

    Federal Court Ruling Bolsters the “Your Work” Exclusion in Standard CGL Policies

    California Appeals Court Says Loss of Use Is “Property Damage” Under Liability Policy, and Damages Can be Measured by Diminished Value

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

    HUD Homeownership Push to Heed Lessons From Crisis, Castro Says

    “If It Walks Like A Duck . . .” – Expert Testimony Not Always Required In Realtor Malpractice Cases Where Alleged Breach Of Duty Can Be Easily Understood By Lay Persons

    As California Faces Mandatory Water Use Reductions How Will the Construction Industry be Impacted?

    Construction Defect Not a RICO Case, Says Court

    S&P Near $1 Billion Mortgage Ratings Settlement With U.S.

    No Coverage for Construction Defects Under Arkansas Law

    Construction Defects Checklist

    “To Indemnify, or Not to Indemnify, that is the Question: California Court of Appeal Addresses Active Negligence in Indemnity Provisions”

    University of Tennessee’s New Humanities Building Construction Set to Begin

    New York High Court: “Issued or Delivered” Includes Policies Insuring Risks in New York

    Reminder: Always Order a Title Search for Your Mechanic’s Lien

    Finalists in San Diego’s Moving Parklet Design Competition Announced

    Pennsylvania Reconstruction Project Beset by Problems

    Builders Arrested after Building Collapses in India

    Economic Loss Doctrine Bars Negligence Claim Against Building Company Owner, Individually

    How Long is Your Construction Warranty?

    Do Hurricane-Prone Coastal States Need to Update their Building Codes?

    Couple Claims Poor Installation of Home Caused Defects

    A UK Bridge That Is a Lesson on How to Build Infrastructure

    Update Relating to SB891 and Bond Claim Waivers

    Loss Ensuing from Faulty Workmanship Covered

    New York Supreme Court Building Opening Delayed Again

    Need to Cover Yourself for “Crisis” Changes on a Job Site? Try These Tips (guest post)

    Outcry Over Peru’s Vast Graft Probe Prompts Top Lawyer to Quit

    Retired Judge Claims Asbestos in Courthouse gave him Cancer

    A Discussion on Home Affordability

    US Appeals Court Slams FERC on Long-Muddled State Environmental Permits

    A Loud Boom, But No Serious Injuries in World Trade Center Accident

    2017 Colorado Construction Defect Recap: Colorado Legislature and Judiciary Make Favorable Advances for Development Community

    Practical Pointers for Change Orders on Commercial Construction Contracts

    How Construction Contracts are Made. Hint: It’s a Bit Like Making Sausage

    Green Construction Trends Contractors Can Expect in 2019

    Beware: Hyper-Technical Labor Code Violations May Expose Employers to Significant Claims for Penalties under the Labor Code California Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA)
    Corporate Profile


    Drawing from more than four thousand construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fort Yukon, Alaska Construction Expert Directory delivers a wide range of trial support and consulting services to legal professionals and construction practice groups seeking effective resolution of construction defect and claims litigation. BHA provides construction claims investigation, testimony, and support 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 in house resources which include construction cost and scheduling experts, registered design professionals, forensic engineers, certified professional estimators, the firm brings national experience and local capabilities to Fort Yukon region.

    Fort Yukon Alaska construction expert testimonyFort Yukon Alaska expert witness concrete failureFort Yukon Alaska building code expert witnessFort Yukon Alaska expert witnesses fenestrationFort Yukon Alaska contractor expert witnessFort Yukon Alaska construction code expert witnessFort Yukon Alaska consulting architect expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Fort Yukon, Alaska

    Legislative Update on Bills of Note (Updated Post-Adjournment)

    March 27, 2019 —
    In two prior posts, one specifically relating to a bill that was introduced to apply a statute of limitatons on state agencies for construction projects and one more general, I discussed some of the legislation pending in the Virginia General Assembly that could be of interest to construction professionals. This post will update the status of these bills and add one that I neglected to highlight in the prior posts. I’ll begin with the oversight. HB 2218 Makes the unlawful and unlicensed practice of contracting, real estate brokering, or real estate sales, in connection with a consumer transaction, unlawful under the Virginia Consumer Protection Act. In short, it makes explicit what was implicit, namely that contractors that perform work without a license are in violation of the VCPA. This bill has passed the house by unanimous vote and is in committee at the Senate. UPDATE– As of February 20, 2019, this bill has passed both houses, all that is left is the paperwork. Post Adjournment Update: This bill passed and awaits Governor’s signature. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at

    Connecticutt Class Action on Collapse Claims Faces Motion to Dismiss

    January 02, 2019 —
    The federal district court dismissed some insurers from a class action suit alleging failure to provide coverage for collapse claims. Halloran v. Harleysville Preferred Ins. Co., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 179807 (D. Conn. Oct. 19, 2018). A class of homeowners brought suit in 2016 against their homeowners insurance companies ("defendants") for failure to cover collapse claims. Plaintiffs alleged they bought their homes between 1984 and 2015. Each of the homes had basement walls that were "crumbling and cracking due to the oxidation of certain minerals contained in the concrete." As a result of the deteriorating concrete, plaintiffs claimed that their basement walls were in a state of collapse. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at

    Second Circuit Finds Potential Ambiguity in Competing “Anti-Concurrent Cause” Provisions in Hurricane Sandy Property Loss

    November 28, 2018 —
    The Second Circuit recently held that competing “anti-concurrent cause” provisions in a commercial property policy present a potential ambiguity that could result in favor of coverage for losses sustained by Madelaine Chocolate after storm surge from Hurricane Sandy combined to cause substantial damage to Madelaine’s property and a resulting loss of income. Madelaine was insured under an all-risk insurance policy issued by Chubb subsidiary Great Northern Insurance Company. By endorsement, Madelaine’s policy added “windstorm” as a covered peril and defined “windstorm” as “wind… regardless of any other cause or event that directly or indirectly contributes concurrently to, or contributed in any sequence to, the loss or damage.” The policy also included a common flood exclusion that removed coverage for loss or damage caused by or resulting from waves, tidal water, or tidal waves, or the rising, overflowing, or breaking of any natural harbors, oceans, or any other body of water, whether driven by wind or not. Like the windstorm endorsement, the flood exclusion contained concurrency language that broadened the exclusion to any loss to which flood contributed, regardless of any other cause or event that directly or indirectly contributed to the loss. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Tae Andrews, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at Mr. Andrews may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Certificates Of Merit For NC Lawsuits Against Engineers And Architects? (Still No)(Law Note)

    April 22, 2019 —
    Certificates of Merit are documents intended to show that a true issue exists with a professional’s work, prior to that person being sued. While North Carolina does require that a person suing a medical provider first have the matter reviewed by a professional (and attest to that in the Complaint), there is no requirement for any review prior to a lawsuit against an architect, engineer, or surveyor. Thus, anyone can file a lawsuit against an engineer/architect/surveyor without first having their case eyeballed reviewed by another professional. Over the years, there have been attempts at adding a Certificate of Merit requirement to design professional lawsuits. See, for example, examples here: from 2005; from 2007; from 2011; and from 2013. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett PLLC
    Ms. Brumback may be contacted at

    Avoiding Disaster Due to Improper Licensing

    February 18, 2019 —
    IT’S NOT ENOUGH FOR A CONTRACTOR TO BE LICENSED . . . it must be properly licensed. We are reminded of this by the recent case of JMS Air Conditioning and Appliance Service, Inc. v. Santa Monica Community College District, Bernards Bros., Inc., 30 Cal. App. 5th 945 (2018). In that case, JMS entered into an $8.2M subcontract with Bernards to install an HVAC system in a new facility being built for the District. JMS held a C-20 warm-air heating, ventilating and air-conditioning license. A year into the project, Bernards sought permission from the District to substitute another subcontractor for JMS (as required under Public Contract Code Section 4107 for listed subcontractors on public works of improvement). Among other things, Bernards contended that JMS was not properly licensed to perform that portion of the work which consisted of hydronic plumbing and hydronic boiler work. JMS countered that this work was an integral part of installing an HVAC system, and relied on Business & Profession Code Section 7059, which permits work that is “incidental and supplemental to the performance of the work for which the specialty contractor is licensed,” and a California State Licensing Board regulation which defines “incidental and supplemental” as meaning “essential to accomplish the work in which the contractor is classified.” (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 16, §831.) Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Candace Matson, Sheppard Mullin
    Ms. Matson may be contacted at

    Can Your Small Business Afford to Risk the Imminent Threat of a Cyber Incident?

    November 28, 2018 —
    Cybersecurity incidents are occurring on a daily basis and at an increasingly growing rate. Yet, many small businesses still have not obtained adequate (or any) cyber insurance to address these risks and the costly impacts to the business that will result. In a recent study completed by the Insurance Information Institute1, only about a third of all small businesses polled responded that they have cyber insurance in place, with 70% of respondents replying that they have no plans to purchase a cyber insurance policy in the next 12 months. Most of the businesses indicated that they do not believe they have any need for cyber insurance, yet almost half of those same companies stated they are unprepared to handle cyber threats. A main reason for not purchasing cyber insurance was a lack of understanding about this type of insurance and coverages available. The Risks for Small Businesses These statistics are alarming considering that the average cost of a cyber-related loss for a small business has increased 250% in the past two years, and now totals $188,400. In determining whether insurance coverage should be purchased, companies typically assess the perceived risks to the company, the likelihood of such risks occurring, as well as any costs or expenses that may result. For example, most companies regularly obtain a property policy to cover a fire or other casualty that may damage its business location even though such an event is unlikely or unexpected. Yet, cyber incidents are just as likely, if not more likely to occur, and the impacts to a company in the event of an incident are far worse. Many incidents result in a complete suspension of the daily operations of the company for several days or longer. In addition to financial loss, companies may face the following as a result of a cyber incident:
    • Theft, breach or loss of information and data;
    • Damage to the company's reputation, brand or image; and
    • Regulatory, governance and legal issues.
    • How Cyber Insurance can Help
    Cyber insurance policies can be obtained to address the losses related to a data breach and may include costs for investigating a breach, notifying people affected by a breach of personally identifiable information, managing the potential damage to reputation and other crisis-management expenses, recovering lost or corrupted data, and related legal expenses. More importantly, well-drafted policies can afford coverage for business interruption losses; i.e. those expenses and lost revenue resulting from a breached system and a company's inability to continue its usual operations. Coverage may also be obtained for "cyber extortion", which covers costs resulting from an extortion event such as ransomware or fraudulent wire transfers. It is important to keep in mind that cyber insurance is only one component to consider when developing and implementing an overall risk management strategy to prevent cyber incidents. However, taking into account the exposure to a company if and when a cyber incident occurs, it is highly advisable to have this coverage in place. 1Insurance Information Institute, "Small business, big risk: Lack of cyber insurance is a serious threat," October 2018. Jeff Dennis is the head of the firm's Privacy & Data Security practice. Jeff works with the firm's clients on cyber-related issues, including contractual and insurance opportunities to lessen their risk. For more information on how Jeff can help, contact him at Heather Whitehead is a Partner in the firm's Privacy & Data Security practice. Heather also practices insurance coverage matters for commercial, retail, industrial, mixed-use, multi-family and residential projects. For more information on how Heather can help, contact her at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Are “Green” Building Designations and Certifications Truly Necessary?

    January 28, 2019 —
    As anyone who reads this construction blog on a regular basis knows, I believe that the move to newer sustainable building practices (while bringing about a new or different set of potential risks) is both necessary and laudable. Because of this fact, you may be asking why the headline for today’s post. After all, I am a LEED AP and assisted in the drafting of the LEED/Green Building addendum to the ConsensusDOCS so I must be pro LEED (or any other) certification of buildings. To the extent that such certification encourages best practices and more sustainable building stock, I am pro certification. However, certification is not a necessary carrot to bring builders around to such practices. As a recent article in EcoHome Magazine (thanks to Todd Hawkins at BuilderFish for alerting me to the article) points out, companies are already moving toward these practices with or without certification and it’s added layer of expense. Economic, air quality, and moral (“its the right thing to do”) factors are pushing executives to such practices. According to EcoHome Magazine, while LEED retains the lions share of green certifications, more and more companies are either using internal standards or trying out other certification programs, including Energy Star. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at

    Court Rejects Efforts to Limit Scope of Judgment Creditor’s Direct Action Under Insurance Code Section 11580

    May 01, 2019 —
    In Ins. Co. of St. of PA v. Amer. Safety Indemnity Co. (No. B283684, filed 3/1/19) (“ICSOP”), a California appeals court rejected one insurer’s efforts to limit the scope of another insurer’s direct action as a judgment creditor under Insurance Code section 11580(b)(2). In ICSOP, homeowners filed a claim in arbitration against their general contractor alleging damages from subsidence. While the arbitration was pending, the general contractor filed suit against the grading subcontractor seeking indemnity and contribution. The complaint attached the homeowners’ complaint in arbitration pleading damages of $2.3 million, and alleged that the subcontractors had a duty to indemnify for those damages. The arbitrator awarded the homeowners $1.1 million. The general contractor was insured by plaintiff ICSOP, which paid the arbitration award. A default judgment was entered against the grading subcontractor for $1.5 million, that included both the arbitration award plus $356,340 for the general contractor’s attorney’s fees. American Safety insured the grading subcontractor but refused to indemnify ICSOP. ICSOP then sued American Safety on the default judgment, pursuant to Insurance Code section 11580(b). The trial court granted summary judgment for ICSOP and the appeals court affirmed. Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at Ms. Moore may be contacted at Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of