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

    Minnesota Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Statutory warranties for one-year, two-year and ten-year periods limits types of construction defects actionable under warranty law; This statute (Chapter 327A) limits liability and excludes normal wear and tear, normal shrinkage caused by drying of the dwelling, loss due to insufficient ventilation, loss or damage from negligence, improper maintenance, or alteration to dwelling, loss or damage from failure to maintain or failure to mitigate


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Red Lake County Minnesota

    Residential contractors need to be licensed. If you work in two or more trades, certain trades will require a license. Call the state for details.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Headwaters Builders Association
    Local # 2480
    PO Box 402
    Bemidji, MN 56619
    http://www.headwatersbuilders.org

    Northern MN Builders Association
    Local # 2417
    802 S Pokegama Ave Ste A
    Grand Rapids, MN 55744
    http://www.nmbuilders.com

    Lake Region Builders Association
    Local # 2470
    1114 Hwy. 59 South Ste 2
    Detroit Lakes, MN 56501
    http://www.lakeregionbuilders.com

    Arrowhead Builders Association
    Local # 2415
    5255 Maple Grove Road
    HERMANTOWN, MN 55811
    http://www.abamn.org

    Home Builders Association of Mid-Minnesota
    Local # 2450
    17068 Commercial Park Road
    Brainerd, MN 56401
    http://www.midmnba.org

    Vikingland Builders Assoc
    Local # 2495
    509 22ND AVE E Ste 200
    Alexandria, MN 56308
    http://www.vikinglandbuilders.com

    Central Minnesota Builders Association
    Local # 2410
    1124 W Saint Germain St
    Saint Cloud, MN 56301
    http://www.cmbaonline.org


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Red Lake County Minnesota

    Background Owner of Property Cannot Be Compelled to Arbitrate Construction Defects

    Court Sends Construction Defect Case from Kansas to Missouri

    Virginia Chinese Drywall “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and number of “occurrences”

    Ohio Adopts Energy-Efficient Building Code

    Late Filing Contractor Barred from Involving Subcontractors in Construction Defect Claim

    Williams v. Athletic Field: Hugely Important Lien Case Argued Before Supreme Court

    Builder Cannot Receive Setoff in Construction Defect Case

    Court Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Construction Defect Suit

    District Court Awards Summary Judgment to Insurance Firm in Framing Case

    Construction Defect Journal Seeks Article Submissions Regarding SB800 and Other Builders Right to Repair Laws

    Homebuilders Go Green in Response to Homebuyer Demand

    Ensuing Losses From Faulty Workmanship Must be Covered

    The Flood Insurance Reform Act May be Extended to 2016

    Five Years of Great Legal Blogging at Insurance Law Hawaii

    Does the New Jersey Right-To-Repair Law Omit Too Many Construction Defects?

    Harsh New Time Limits on Construction Defect Claims

    Construction on the Rise in Denver

    Hawaii Building Codes to Stay in State Control

    Liability policy covers negligent construction: GA high court

    Des Moines Home Builders Building for Habitat for Humanity

    Lien Law Unlikely To Change — Yet

    After Katrina Came Homes that Could Withstand Isaac

    Webinar on Insurance Disputes in Construction Defects

    Pennsylvania Court Extends Construction Defect Protections to Subsequent Buyers

    Policyholder Fails to Build Adequate Record to Support Bad Faith Claim

    Contractor Sues Supplier over Defective Products

    Insurer Must Defend Claims for Diminution in Value of Damaged Property

    Federal Judge Dismisses Insurance Coverage Lawsuit In Construction Defect Case

    Cleveland Condo Board Says Construction Defects Caused Leaks

    All Risk Policy Only Covers Repair to Portion of Dock That Sustains Damage

    Minnesota Starts Wide-Ranging Registration of Contractors

    Construction Defects Lead to Demolition of Seattle’s 25-story McGuire Apartments Building

    The Ever-Growing Thicket Of California Civil Code Section 2782

    Hospital Construction Firm Settles Defect Claim for $1.1 Million

    Fire Reveals Defects, Appeals Court Affirms Judgment against Builder

    Condo Owners Allege Construction Defects

    HOA Has No Claim to Extend Statute of Limitations in Construction Defect Case

    In Colorado, Primary Insurers are Necessary Parties in Declaratory Judgment Actions

    Nevada Assembly Sends Construction Defect Bill to Senate

    After Construction Defect Case, Repairs to Austin Building

    Construction Spending Dropped in July

    Contractor Manslaughter? Safety Shortcuts Are Not Worth It

    Colorado Statutes of Limitations and Repose, A First Step in Construction Defect Litigation

    In Oregon Construction Defect Claims, “Contract Is (Still) King”

    Court Orders House to be Demolished or Relocated

    Amerisure Case to be Heard by Texas Supreme Court

    Florida Chinese drywall, pollution exclusion, “your work” exclusion, and “sistership” exclusion.

    Ninety-Day Extension Denied to KB Home in Construction Defect Insurance Claim

    Construction Defect Not Occurrences, Says Hawaii Court

    Insurance Policy Provides No Coverage For Slab Collapse in Vision One

    Arizona Homeowners Must Give Notice of Construction Defect Claims

    Virginia Homebuilding Slumps After Last Year’s Gain

    Washington Supreme Court Sides with Lien Claimants in Williams v. Athletic Field

    Condo Owners Worried Despite Settlement

    Ohio subcontractor work exception to the “your work” exclusion

    Contractors Admit Involvement in Kickbacks

    Florida trigger

    Equipment Costs? It’s a Steal!

    Retaining Wall Contractor Not Responsible for Building Damage

    Construction Defect Not an Occurrence in Ohio

    Construction Case Alert: Appellate Court Confirms Engineer’s Duty to Defend Developer Arises Upon Tender of Indemnity Claim

    Nevada Court Adopts Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    Hovnanian Increases Construction Defect Reserves for 2012

    Insurer Settles on Construction Defect Claim

    Faulty Workmanship Causing Damage to Other Property Covered as Construction Defect

    Architectural Firm Disputes Claim of Fault

    Court Will Not Compel Judge to Dismiss Construction Defect Case

    Defective Drains Covered Despite Water Intrusion Exclusion

    Michigan Supreme Court Concludes No Statute of Repose on Breach of Contract

    Allowing the Use of a General Verdict Form in a Construction Defect Case Could Subject Your Client to Prejudgment Interest

    Legislatures Shouldn’t Try to Do the Courts’ Job

    Colorado Court of Appeals Finds Damages to Non-Defective Property Arising From Defective Construction Covered Under Commercial General Liability Policy

    Washington Court of Appeals Upholds Standard of Repose in Fruit Warehouse Case

    Harmon Tower Construction Defects Update: Who’s To Blame?

    Insurer Has Duty to Disclose Insured's Interest In Obtaining Written Explanation of Arbitration Award

    California Bill Would Notify Homeowners on Construction Defect Options

    Mortar Insufficient to Insure Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Case

    Developer’s Fraudulent Statements Are His Responsibility Alone in Construction Defect Case

    Although Property Damage Arises From An Occurrence, Coverage Barred By Business Risk Exclusions

    El Paso Increases Surety Bond Requirement on Contractors

    Ohio Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Ohio Casualty’s and Beazer’s Motions were Granted in Part, and Denied in Part

    Building Inspector Jailed for Taking Bribes

    The Montrose Language Interpreted: How Many Policies Are Implicated By A Construction Defect That Later Causes a Flood?

    Eleventh Circuit Asks Georgia Supreme Court if Construction Defects Are Caused by an "Occurrence"

    Exclusions Bar Coverage for Damage Caused by Chinese Drywall

    Plaintiff Not Entitled to Further Damages over Defective Decking

    Judge Kobayashi Determines No Coverage for Construction Defect Claim

    Will They Blow It Up?

    Surveyors Statute Trumps Construction Defect Claim in Tennessee
    Corporate Profile

    RED LAKE COUNTY MINNESOTA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Red Lake County, Minnesota Construction Expert Witness Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 5,500 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Red Lake County's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, as well as a variety of state and local government agencies.









    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Red Lake County, Minnesota

    Equipment Costs? It’s a Steal!

    July 8, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    KCBD reports on the problems of a Lubbock, Texas contractor. It’s hard to do the job when your tools keep getting stolen. Corey Meadows, owner of Top Cut Interiors, told KCBD that he had chained an air compressor to a table saw. Since the thieves couldn’t cut the chain, they cut the table saw “and just took the air compressor and the chain.” Meadows estimates the thieves cost him $2,000 in damaged or stolen equipment and time lost.

    Read the full story…


    Exclusion Bars Coverage for Mold, Fungus

    October 23, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The court considered whether rain damage to a house was barred by the policy's mold exclusion. Stewart v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 2012 U.S. Dist LEXIS 127804 (D. S.D. Sept. 7, 2012).

    The insureds hired DJ Construction to build a new home. Before construction was completed, it was discovered that DJ Construction and some of its subcontractors had failed to protect the partially constructed house from the elements, which allowed melting snow and rain to intrude into the house. Soon after this discovery, DJ Construction abandoned the project. The house remained incomplete and uninhabitable.

    The insureds sued DJ Construction.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com


    Texas exclusions j(5) and j(6).

    April 27, 2011 — April 27, 2011, by CDCoverage.com

    In Evanston Ins. Co. v. D&L Masonry of Lubbock, Inc., No. 07-10-00358-CV (Tex. Ct. App. April 18, 2011), insured masonry subcontractor D&L sued its CGL insurer Evanston to recover costs incurred by D&L for the replacement of window frames damaged by D&L while performing masonry work adjacent to the window frames. The trial court granted summary judgment for D&L.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com


    Ensuing Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

    December 9, 2011 — Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    Water intrusion caused by a construction defect was not covered under the all risk policy’s ensuing loss provision. See Friedberg v. Chubb & Son, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123582 (D. Minn. Oct. 25, 2011).

    Extensive water damage was discovered in the insureds’ home when a small hole in the exterior wall was being repaired. Chubb’s adjuster and an expert found water intrusion causing rot, mold, and damage to the home’s wood framing and insulation. Chubb denied coverage because water intruded through the roof and wall, resulting in gradual deterioration. The insureds filed suit.

    The policy excluded coverage for construction defects, but insured "ensuing covered loss unless another exclusion applies."

    The court agreed there was a prima facie case for coverage because the home suffered a physical loss.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com


    Cabinetmaker Exceeds Expectations as Conditions Improve

    October 23, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    American Woodmark, the manufacturer of several national brands of cabinets and vanities, saw greater than anticipated earnings in its most recent quarter. Their revenue was $148.3 million, an increase of 13% over the same quarter a year prior. They saw a 40% increase in sales. As a result, their per-share earnings were 7 cents, instead of the projected loss of 3 cents per share. Forbes reports that the share price for American Woodmark has been rising in August 2012.

    Read the full story…


    Amerisure Case to be Heard by Texas Supreme Court

    August 16, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has withdrawn its decision in Ewing Construction Company Inc. v. Amerisure Insurance Company, according to Insurance Developments. The Fifth Circuit had concluded that “a contractor’s obligation to perform its contact in a workmanlike manner constituted an ‘assumption of liability.’” Two questions have now been certified to the Texas Supreme Court. The dissent in the case argued the majority had misread Texas Supreme Court precedent. The court will now have the opportunity to clarify this matter.

    Read the full story…


    A Performance-Based Energy Code in Seattle: Will It Save Existing Buildings?

    August 11, 2011 — Douglas Reiser, Builders Counsel

    The City of Seattle has one of the most stringent energy codes in the nation. Based upon the Washington State Energy Code (which has been embroiled in litigation over its high standards), the code demands a lot from commercial developers. But, does it prevent developers from saving Seattle?s classic and old buildings? Perhaps.

    The general compliance procedure requires buildings to be examined during the permitting process. This means that buildings are examined before they begin operating. The procedure is not malleable and is applicable to all buildings, old and new, big and small.

    The downside of this procedure is that it eliminates awarding compliance to those buildings exhibiting a number of passive features, such as siting, thermal mass, and renewable energy production. This problem has prevented a number of interesting and architecturally pleasing existing building retrofits from getting off the ground. The cost of complying with the current system can be 20% more, and it might prevent builders from preserving a building?s historical integrity.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Douglas Reiser of Reiser Legal LLC. Mr. Reiser can be contacted at info@reiserlegal.com

    Battle of “Other Insurance” Clauses

    March 23, 2011 — Tred R. Eyerly - Insurance Law Hawaii - March 23, 2011

    The New York Court of Appeals considered the impact of competing “other insurance” provisions located in both a CGL policy and a D&O policy. See Fieldston Property Owners Assoc., Inc. v. Hermitage Ins. Co., Inv., 2011 N.Y. LEXIS 254 (N.Y. Feb. 24, 2011).

    In the underlying case, Fieldston’s officers were charged with making false statements and fraudulent claims with respect to a customer's right to access its property from adjacent streets. Suit was eventually filed against Fieldston and its officers, alleging several causes of action including injurious falsehood. Damages were sought.

    Fieldston’s CGL policy was issued by Hermitage. The “other insurance” provision stated, “If other valid and collectible insurance is available to the insured for a loss we cover . . . our obligations are limited,” but also stated it would share with all other insurance as a primary policy.

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com


    Florida trigger

    August 4, 2011 — CDCoverage.com

    In Mid-Continent Casualty Co. v. Siena Home Corp., No. 5:08-CV-385-Oc-10GJK (M.D. Fla. July 8, 2011), insured residential real estate developer Siena was sued by homeowners seeking damages for moisture penetration property damage resulting from exterior wall construction defects. Siena’s CGL insurer Mid-Continent filed suit seeking a declaratory judgment of no duty to defend or indemnify in part on the basis that the alleged “property damage” did not manifest during the Mid-Continent policy period.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com


    More Charges in Las Vegas HOA Scandal

    September 13, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The indictments continue in the Las Vegas HOA scandal. A lawyer for the Justice Department told the judge in the case that “we expect several indictments before the end of the year.” According to the Las Vegas Review Journal, “a dozen or more” additional people will be charged in the conspiracy.

    The judge in the case, Senior U.S. District Judge Lloyd George, told prosecutors that he wanted to address the issue of compensation for homeowners. Currently, defendants have agreed to pay $1.5 million to compensate homeowners associations and banks. Vistana homeowners have claimed that the conspirators got the bulk of a $19 million construction defect settlement.

    Read the full story…


    Save A Legal Fee? Sometimes You Better Talk With Your Construction Attorney

    May 10, 2012 — Douglas Reiser, Builders Counsel

    I love writing this column, because I think it’s refreshing for contractors to hear that they don’t always need an attorney. Today’s post is the “Un-Save a Legal Fee” because I want to point out a specific illustration of when you definitely need your attorney. Using a construction contract template can be fine, but you always need to consider its application to each project ? or it could bite you in the rear.

    Seattle attorney Paul Cressman published a prime depiction of bad contract management, last week. A Florida appellate court struck down a general contractor’s “pay if paid” clause when it became ambiguous because of some incorporated language from its prime contract. Specifically, a clause in the prime contract required the general contractor to pay all subcontractors before receiving payment from the owner, while the general contractor’s “pay if paid” clause required its subcontractors to wait for payment until it arrived from the owner.

    Read the full story…


    Mobile Home Owners Not a Class in Drainage Lawsuit

    March 1, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Comparing it to a “complex construction defect action,” the California Court of Appeals for Orange County has rejected the claims of a group of mobile home owners that they should be certified as a class in their lawsuit against Huntington Shorecliffs Mobilehome Park. The Appeals court sustained the judgment of the lower court. The court issued a decision in the case of Criswell v. MMR Family LLC on January 17, 2012.

    The claims made by the group were that the owners and operators of the mobile home park had known of an “on-going and potentially worsening shallow groundwater condition on the property” and had “exacerbated the problem by changing ‘the configuration and drainage related to the hillside that abuts’ the park.” The homeowners claimed that the class should consist of “any past or current homeowner during the same time frame” who had experienced “the accumulation of mold, fungus, and/or other toxins,” “property damage to his/her mobilehome and/or other property resulting from drainage problems, water seepage, water accumulation, moisture build-up, mold, fungus, and/or other toxins,” emotional distress related to drainage problems or mold, and finally health problems “resulting from exposure to drainage problems, water seepage, water accumulation, moisture build-up, mold, fungus, and/or other toxins, in or around one’s home, lot, or common areas of the park.”

    The lower court concluded that while the limits of the class were identifiable, they failed to constitute a class in other ways. First, the people affected were small enough in number that they could be brought together. They “are not so numerous that it would be impracticable to bring them all before the Court.”

    The court noted that while many of the homeowners would have issues in common, they did not find “a well-defined community of interest among the class members.” The Appeals Court wrote that “the individual issues affecting each mobile home and homeowner will predominate over the common issue of the presence of standing or pooling water in and around the park.” The court noted that each home would be affected differently by water and “the ‘accumulation of mold, fungus, and/or other toxins.’”

    While the court conceded that there would be common issues, such as the “defendants’ alleged concealment of excess moisture conditions and their allegedly negligent roadwork and landscaping,” they noted that “these common issues would be swamped by the swarm of individual determinations of property damage, emotional distress, and personal injury.” The Appeals Court cited an earlier case that ruled against certification “if a class action ‘will splinter into individual trials.’” The court affirmed the judgment of the lower court that they could not proceed as a class.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Partial Settlement in DeKalb Construction Management Case

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The DeKalb County School District has made a partial settlement in a lawsuit over their claims of mismanagement of construction projects. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports that the school board settled with E. R. Mitchell & Co., the smaller of two firms that they have sued. As part of the settlement, Mitchell will be testifying against their former partner. Claims from the other side of the lawsuit are that the school board improperly fired the Heery/Mitchell partnership. The superintendant who fired the company, Crawford Lewis, and his chief operations office, Pat Reid, have since been charged with criminal conspiracy to defraud the construction program. A lawyer for Heery said that “we believe that when presented to a jury, Heery will be vindicated.”

    Read the full story…


    Ambitious Building Plans in Boston

    November 18, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Although most are unlikely to change the Boston skyline, there are several large projects on the drawing boards. The site BostInnovation covered ten of them in a recent post. Downtown Boston will be the site of several of these large projects, including three towers to be added to the Christian Science Plaza, a 404-unit residential tower in the Theater District, and perhaps the largest of these projects, a 47-story tower to be built over Copley Plaza, which will tower over the adjacent buildings. None of the planned buildings will challenge the Hancock Tower’s 60 stories.

    Read the full story…


    Windows and Lawsuits Fly at W Hotel

    July 5, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    An Austin, Texas lawyer has filed a lawsuit against Starwood Hotels and Resorts, the operator of the W Hotel Austin, after two people were struck by glass which fell from the hotel’s balconies. YNN in Austin reports that the hotel has been closed indefinitely as construction workers removed panels. An additional three panels fell before work started. Randy Howry, the lawyer representing the injured parties, notes that in May glass falling from the W Hotel in Atlanta killed one woman and injured another. “Seventeen days pass and we put them on notice, our clients have put them on notice, yet nothing has been done an only after the glass fell yesterday did they do something about it,” YNN quotes Howry.

    The hotel released a statement that they will be replacing all of the balcony glass to ensure safety for their guests and the general public. They relocated all hotel guests and coordinated with Austin officials to close adjacent sidewalks and roads. The statement identifies the firms involved with the design and construction of the balconies.

    Read the full story …


    Insurance Company Prevails in “Chinese Drywall” Case

    June 17, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The Louisiana Court of Appeals rejected an appeal to reverse a summary judgment granted to Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Company. Terrence and Rhonda Ross contracted for a remodel of their home in which Chinese-made drywall was used. When the drywall emitted harmful gasses, the Rosses filed a claim under their insurance policy. This claim was rejected under four exclusions: for faulty materials, latent defect, loss by corrosion, and loss by pollution. After the claim was denied, the Rosses sued Louisiana Citizens.

    In April 2010, the lower court granted a summary judgment, followed by a May, 2010 order dismissing the Rosses’ claims against Louisiana Citizens. The Rosses appealed this decision. In the court’s review, they agreed with Louisiana Citizens and the lower court on all counts. Although the Rosses maintained that the drywall was not defective (as it still functioned as drywall), the court ruled that its emission of sulfuric gases was a defect. Further, as it was in place for two years before this became evident, it was also a latent defect. Damage to the Rosses’ home consisted of corrosion damage caused by the pollutants in the drywall.

    The Rosses made an additional claim that since their policy covered smoke damage, this should be covered, as the harm was done by sulfuric gases. The court noted that the contract specifies “fumes or vapors from a boiler, furnace, or related equipment,” none of which apply in this case.

    Read the court’s decision


    Defective Grout May Cause Trouble for Bridges

    August 16, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Grout, which was used to protect the steel support cables of the Woodrow Wilson Bridge, may lead to problems instead. The Baltimore Sun reports that the Federal Highway Administration is looking at three dozen bridges in twenty-one states that were built with defective grout. The grout contains high levels of chlorides, which can lead to corrosion. The collapse of pedestrian walkway in Concord, North Carolina was attributed to chloride contamination in the grout.

    The grout, SikaGrout 300PT, was advertised as "non-corrosive, does not contain chlorides," but later testing showed that it contained levels that exceeded limits by 400 percent. Throughout the country, about 16 million pounds of this were used. Sika Corp. suspended production of the grout in 2010. If repairs need to be made, it is unclear who will pay.

    Read the full story…


    New Washington Law Nixes Unfair Indemnification in Construction Contracts

    April 25, 2012 — Douglas Reiser, Builders Cousel

    Contractual fairness ? it is part of my mantra. If you read the blog, you probably know that I preach brevity, balance and clarity in contracting. The State of Washington did well to finally eliminate something that has angered me for quite some time ? unfair indemnification.

    One of my favorite construction contract revisions is mutual indemnification. Many “up the chain” contractors and owners are going to stick you with a unilateral indemnification clause that protects them for just about everything, including their own fumbling of a project. Adding mutual indemnification provides some balance, and keeps parties reliant upon each other for success on the job site.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Douglas Reiser of Reiser Legal LLC. Mr. Reiser can be contacted at info@reiserlegal.com