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

    Kansas Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: HB 2294 requires a claimant to serve a written notice of claim upon the contractor prior to filing a lawsuit. The law places deadlines on the contractor to serve notice on each subcontractor (15 days) and provide a written response to the claimant (30 days). It permits the claimant to file a lawsuit without further notice if the contractor disputes the claim, does not respond to the notice, does not complete work on the defect on a timely basis or does not make a payment in the time allowed.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Zenda Kansas

    No state license for general contracting. All businesses must register with the Department of Revenue.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Wichita Area Builders Association
    Local # 1780
    730 N Main St
    Wichita, KS 67203
    http://www.wabahome.com

    Home Builders Association of Hutchinson
    Local # 1720
    PO Box 2209
    Hutchinson, KS 67504
    http://www.hutchbuilders.org

    McPherson Area Contractors Association
    Local # 1735
    PO Box 38
    McPherson, KS 67460


    Home Builders Association of Salina
    Local # 1750
    2125 Crawford Place
    Salina, KS 67401
    http://www.salinahba.com

    Lawrence Home Builders Association
    Local # 1723
    PO Box 3490
    Lawrence, KS 66046
    http://www.lhba.net

    Topeka Home Builders Association
    Local # 1765
    1505 SW Fairlawn Rd
    Topeka, KS 66604
    http://www.thba.com

    Kansas Home Builders Association
    Local # 1700
    212 SW 8th Ave Ste 201
    Topeka, KS 66603
    http://www.kansasbuilders.org


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Zenda Kansas

    Chinese Drywall Manufacturer Claims Product Was Not for American Market

    Renters Who Bought Cannot Sue for Construction Defects

    Man Pleads Guilty in Construction Kickback Scheme

    Rescission of Policy for Misrepresentation in Application Reversed

    U.S. Home Prices Rose More Than Estimated in February

    Home Construction Slows in Las Vegas

    New York Developers Facing Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Existence of “Duty” in Negligence Action is Question of Law

    Doing Construction Lead Programs the Right Way

    Flow-Down Clauses Can Drown Your Project

    Newmeyer & Dillion Gets Top-Tier Practice Area Rankings on U.S. News – Best Lawyers List

    Construction on the Rise in Washington Town

    County Sovereign Immunity Invokes Change-Order Ordinance

    Lennar Profit Tops Estimates as Home Prices Increase

    Picketing Threats

    Duty To Defend Construction Defect Case Affirmed, Duty to Indemnify Reversed In Part

    Should a Subcontractor provide bonds to a GC who is not himself bonded? (Bonding Agent Perspective)

    Beverly Hills Voters Reject Plan for Enclave's Tallest Building

    No Coverage for Additional Insured

    A Court-Side Seat: Environmental Developments on the Ninth Circuit

    Manhattan Gets First Crowdfunded Condos

    South Africa Wants Payment From Colluding World Cup Builders

    Reroof Blamed for $10 Million in Damage

    Residential Building Sector: Peaking or Soaring?

    BWBO Celebrating Attorney Award and Two New Partners

    Brazil’s Former President Turns Himself In to Police

    Regions Where Residential Construction Should Boom in 2014

    Anatomy of an Indemnity Provision

    Alabama Appeals Court Rules Unexpected and Unintended Property Damage is an Occurrence

    Woman Files Suit for Property Damages

    Baby Boomer Housing Deficit Coming?

    The Quiet War Between California’s Charter Cities and the State’s Prevailing Wage Law

    Environmental Roundup – April 2019

    Court Rules in Favor of Treasure Island Developers in Environmental Case

    Mid-Session Overview of Colorado’s 2017 Construction Defect Legislation

    Duke Energy Appeals N.C. Order to Excavate Nine Coal Ash Pits

    Window Installer's Alleged Faulty Workmanship On Many Projects Constitutes Multiple Occurrences

    Gardeners in the City of the Future: An Interview with Eric Baczuk

    Supplement to New California Construction Laws for 2019

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

    Economic Damages and the Right to Repair Act: You Can’t Have it Both Ways

    Small to Midsize Builders Making Profit on Overlooked Lots

    NYC Developer Embraces Religion in Search for Condo Sites

    Why You May Not Want a Mandatory Mediation Clause in Your Construction Contract

    Aurora Joins other Colorado Cities by Adding a Construction Defect Ordinance

    Renovation Contractors: Be Careful How You Disclose Your Projects

    Court Holds That Trimming of Neighbor’s Trees is Not an Insured Accident or Occurrence

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

    Megaproject Savings Opportunities

    Construction Defect Claim Did Not Harm Homeowner, Court Rules
    Corporate Profile

    ZENDA KANSAS CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    With over four thousand construction and design related expert witness designations, the Zenda, Kansas Construction Expert Directory offers a wide range of trial support and construction consulting services to legal professionals and construction practice groups concerned with construction defect and claims matters. BHA provides construction related consulting and expert witness support services to the nation's most recognized builders, risk managers, legal professionals, owners, state and local government agencies. Utilizing in house assets which include credentialed construction consultants, NCARB certified architects, forensic engineers, building envelope and design experts, the firm brings national experience and local capabilities to Zenda and the surrounding areas.

    Zenda Kansas structural concrete expertZenda Kansas engineering expert witnessZenda Kansas expert witness concrete failureZenda Kansas consulting engineersZenda Kansas expert witness commercial buildingsZenda Kansas architecture expert witnessZenda Kansas expert witness roofing
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Zenda, Kansas

    General Contractors Have Expansive Common Law and Statutory Duties To Provide a Safe Workplace

    February 18, 2020 —
    On November 21, 2019, the Washington Supreme Court handed down its decision in Vargas v. Inland Washington, LLC.[1] At the time of the incident in May 2013, Mr. Vargas, the plaintiff, was helping pour the concrete walls for what would become a parking garage for an apartment building. He was employed by Hilltop Concrete Construction. Inland Washington was the general contractor, and subcontracted with Hilltop to pour concrete. Hilltop, in turn, entered into agreements with Ralph’s Concrete Pumping and Miles Sand & Gravel to provide a pump truck, certified pump operator, and supply concrete. A rubber hose carrying concrete whipped Mr. Vargas in the head. It knocked him unconscious and caused a traumatic brain injury. Vargas, through his guardian ad litem, along with his wife and children, sued Inland Washington, Ralph’s, and Miles. The trial court initially dismissed on summary judgment Vargas’ claims that Inland Washington was vicariously liable for the acts of Hilltop, Ralph’s, and Miles. Later, the trial court also granted Inland Washington’s motion for summary judgment that it was not directly liable as a matter of law. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Paul R. Cressman Jr., Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Cressman may be contacted at paul.cressman@acslawyers.com

    Board of Directors Guidance When Addressing Emergency Circumstances Occasioned by the COVID-19 Pandemic

    May 11, 2020 —
    The COVID-19 pandemic has sent massive shockwaves throughout the global economy. This crises requires business leaders to confront a host of deleterious effects on an emergency basis – the likes of which many companies have never experienced. Boards of directors must remain cognizant of their oversight responsibilities in these trying times. This post offers guidance to directors of Delaware companies for addressing emergency circumstances occasioned by the COVID-19 pandemic. Board Oversight – Lessons from Marchand V. Barnhill Directors should consider the lessons learned from the recent Delaware Supreme Court case Marchand v. Barnhill, a ruling we addressed in a previous blog post, when considering board oversight during the COVID-19 pandemic. Marchand centered on a lawsuit brought by shareholders in an ice cream manufacturing company against the company’s board of directors. The shareholders claimed that the directors violated their duty of loyalty[1] to the company when they failed to provide sufficient oversight and compliance-monitoring during a listeria outbreak that led the company to recall all products, temporarily cease product production at all plants and lay off more than one-third of the company’s workforce. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP attorneys Marc Casarino, Lori Smith and Gwenn Barney Mr. Casarino may be contacted at casarinom@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Smith may be contacted at smithl@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Barney may be contacted at Barneyg@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Force Majeure, Construction Delays, Labor Shortages and COVID-19

    April 06, 2020 —
    The global effect of the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is still unknown, and the progress of many large-scale construction projects has been affected by “Shelter in Place” orders, although some states and localities have classified construction projects as “essential.” Just last Friday, New York shut down all construction, with few exceptions. Several states have enacted gathering bans of all sizes (including Michigan, Oregon, New Mexico, Washington, New York, New Jersey, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, West Virginia, California) and more people are likely to be quarantined as widespread testing becomes available. These decisions will undoubtedly affect the supply of materials and labor necessary for construction projects. Officials have turned to increasingly disruptive and measures to control the spread of the virus in addition to event prohibitions and school closures, including restricting people to their homes, and closing businesses that are not “essential.” While many companies have adopted mandatory telecommuting, this is an impossibility on the construction sites. Eventually, supply and labor shortages due to governmental restrictions or quarantines will affect the critical path of construction projects. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Elizabeth J. Dye, Pillsbury
    Ms. Dye may be contacted at elizabeth.dye@pillsburylaw.com

    COVID-19 Impacts on Subcontractor Default Insurance and Ripple Effects

    April 20, 2020 —
    Subcontractor default insurance (“SDI”) may be described as an alternative to bonding subcontractors. SDI is first-party insurance that compensates the general contractor insured in the event a covered subcontractor fails to fulfill its contractual obligations. Under SDI policies, general contractor insureds are obligated to develop and implement rigorous subcontractor prequalification procedures. Basic questions and answers about how SDI might come into play and impact the construction industry in response to COVID-19 follow: Who may make a claim on an SDI policy? The general contractor may make a claim. An Owner may make a claim if the general contractor becomes insolvent in many cases. Subcontractors may not make claims on SDI policies. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Smith Currie
    The Smith Currie firm may be contacted at info@smithcurrie.com

    Wait! Don’t Sign Yet: Reviewing Contract Protections During the COVID Pandemic

    April 13, 2020 —
    As the circumstances of the COVID pandemic change day by day, and we all rush to keep business moving where and when we can, companies should consider hitting the “pause button” before renewing or executing any new contracts. Developing contracts often takes considerable time and expense, and companies are not in the habit of reworking them often. A change in law may prompt a company to revisit their contract terms, but otherwise business is often carried out with a standard form contract for a period of years. With the COVID pandemic affecting nearly every business and industry, life is not business as usual, and companies should make sure their contracts consider what previously seemed like an unforeseeable event. Force Majeure clauses are included in many contracts to excuse contract performance when made impossible by some unforeseen circumstance. These clauses typically fall under two categories: general and specific. General force majeure clauses excuse performance if performance is prevented by circumstances outside the parties’ control. By contrast, specific force majeure clauses detail the exhaustive list of circumstances (acts of god, extreme weather, war, riot, terrorism, embargoes) which would excuse contract performance. Force majeure clauses are typically interpreted narrowly. If your contract has a specific clause and pandemic or virus is not one of the listed circumstances it may not apply. Whether a particular existing contract covers the ongoing COVID pandemic will vary depending on the language of the contract. Force majeure clauses previously made headlines when the great economic recession hit in 2008. A number of courts held that simple economic hardship was not enough to invoke force majeure. The inability to pay or lack of desire to pay for the contracted goods or services did not qualify as force majeure. In California, impossibility turns on the nature of the contractual performance, and not in the inability of the obligor to do it. (Kennedy v. Reece (1964) 225 Cal. App. 2d 717, 725.) In other words, the task is objectively impossible not merely impossible or more burdensome to the specific contracting party. California has codified “force majeure” protection where the parties haven’t included any language or the circumstances in the clause don’t apply to the situation at hand. Civil Code section 1511 excuses performance when “prevented or delayed by an irresistible, superhuman cause, or by the act of public enemies of this state or of the United States, unless the parties have expressly agreed to the contrary.” (Civ. Code § 1511.) What qualifies as a “superhuman cause”? In California, the test is whether under the particular circumstances there was such an insuperable interference occurring without the party's intervention as could not have been prevented by the exercise of prudence, diligence and care. (Pacific Vegetable Oil Corp. v. C. S. T., Ltd. (1946) 29 Cal.2d 228, 238.) If you find yourself in an existing contract without a force majeure clause, or the statute does not apply, you may consider the doctrine of frustration of purpose. This doctrine is applied narrowly where performance remains possible, but the fundamental reason the parties entered into the contract has been severely or substantially frustrated by an unanticipated supervening circumstance, thus destroying substantially the value of the contract. (Cutter Laboratories, Inc. v. Twining (1963) 221 Cal. App. 2d 302, 314-15.) In other words, performance is still possible but valueless. Note this defense is not likely to apply where the contract has simply become less profitable for one party. Now that COVID is no longer an unforeseeable event, but rather a current and grave reality, a party executing a contract today without adequate protections may have a difficult time proving unforeseeability. Scientists are not sure whether warm weather will suppress the spread of the virus, as it does with the seasonal flu, but to the extent we get a reprieve during the summer we may see a resurgence of cases this Fall or Winter. Companies should take care in reviewing force majeure clauses, and other clauses tied to timely performance such as delay and liquidated damages before renewing or executing new contracts. Your contract scenario may vary from the summary provided above. Please contact legal counsel before making any decisions. During this critical time, BPH’s attorneys can be reached via email to answer your questions. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Danielle S. Ward, Balestreri Potocki & Holmes
    Ms. Ward may be contacted at dward@bph-law.com

    Loan Modifications Due to COVID-19 Pandemic: FDIC Answers CARES Act FAQs

    May 11, 2020 —
    In support of financial institutions and borrowers during the COVID-19 pandemic, the newly enacted Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) includes a number of provisions permitting lenders to suspend, during a covered period, requirements under U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) with respect to categorizing certain loan modifications as a troubled debt restructuring (TDR) due to COVID-19. In light of the CARES Act, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) issued a series of answers to FAQs for financial institutions with respect to loan modifications. The FAQs help guide lenders as well as borrowers as they address pending defaults under existing credit facilities. The FAQs encourage financial institutions to work with borrowers who may be unable to meet their payment obligations due to COVID-19 in several ways: Payment Accommodations Short-term accommodations which modify, extend, suspend or defer repayment terms should be intended to facilitate the borrower’s ability to work through the immediate impact of the virus. According to the FAQs, all loan accommodation programs should ultimately be targeted towards repayment. To that end, the FDIC recommends that financial institutions address deferred or skipped payments by either extending the original maturity date or by making those payments due in a balloon payment at the maturity date of the loan. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams attorneys Nancy Sabol Frantz, Marissa Levy, Timothy E. Davis and Kristen E. Andreoli Ms. Frantz may be contacted at frantzn@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Levy may be contacted at levymp@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Davis may be contacted at davist@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Andreoli may be contacted at andreolik@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Colorado Temporarily Requires Employers to Provide Sick Leave While Awaiting COVID-19 Testing

    April 06, 2020 —
    On March 11, 2020, the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment (CDLE) issued emergency rules, referred to as Colorado Health Emergency Leave with Pay (Colorado HELP) Rules, requiring employers in certain industries to provide four days of paid sick leave to employees with flu-like symptoms while awaiting test results for COVID-19, or to anyone who is under instructions from a healthcare provider to quarantine or isolate due to a risk of having COVID-19. These rules take effect immediately for 30 days, or longer if the state of emergency declared by Colorado Governor Polis continues. Which industries are covered by the Colorado HELP Rules?
    • Leisure and hospitality;
    • Food services;
    • Child care;
    • Education (including transportation, food service, and related work at educational establishments);
    • Home health (if working with elderly, disabled, ill, or otherwise high-risk individuals)
    • Nursing homes; and
    • Community living facilities; and
    • Retail establishments that sell groceries (added March 26).
    How much paid sick leave must be provided? Employers are required to provide up to four days of paid sick leave to employees with flu-like symptoms who are being tested for COVID-19. If the employee tests negative, the leave ends. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Shawna Ruetz, Lewis Brisbois
    Ms. Ruetz may be contacted at Shawna.Ruetz@lewisbrisbois.com

    It Was a Wild Week for Just About Everyone. Ok, Make that Everyone.

    April 06, 2020 —
    It was a crazy week last week as the number of coronavirus cases in the United States jumped to 32,783 cases as of Sunday, from 3,680 cases, just a week before. In an attempt to “flatten the curve” and help those impacted by the virus, numerous federal, state, and local orders were issued, including orders requiring that residents “shelter in place.” For businesses impacted by the “shelter in place” orders, which, in California, means virtually every business in the state following Governor Newsom’s state-wide “shelter in place” order, there’s been confusion as to who can and can’t continue to work under the orders including among contractors and project owners. Although things have been changing, sometimes daily, here’s what you need to know about the “shelter in place” orders: The Local “Shelter In Place” Orders On Monday, March 16, 2020, six Bay Area counties, and the City of Berkeley, issued “shelter in place” orders requiring that residents in those counties and city shelter in place except for “Essential Activities,” if performing “Essential Governmental Functions,” or if operating “Essential Businesses.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com