BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    multi family housing Building Consultant La Crosse Kansas landscaping construction Building Consultant La Crosse Kansas industrial building Building Consultant La Crosse Kansas production housing Building Consultant La Crosse Kansas retail construction Building Consultant La Crosse Kansas condominiums Building Consultant La Crosse Kansas Subterranean parking Building Consultant La Crosse Kansas institutional building Building Consultant La Crosse Kansas condominium Building Consultant La Crosse Kansas hospital construction Building Consultant La Crosse Kansas office building Building Consultant La Crosse Kansas parking structure Building Consultant La Crosse Kansas custom homes Building Consultant La Crosse Kansas tract home Building Consultant La Crosse Kansas Medical building Building Consultant La Crosse Kansas custom home Building Consultant La Crosse Kansas casino resort Building Consultant La Crosse Kansas high-rise construction Building Consultant La Crosse Kansas structural steel construction Building Consultant La Crosse Kansas low-income housing Building Consultant La Crosse Kansas housing Building Consultant La Crosse Kansas concrete tilt-up Building Consultant La Crosse Kansas
    La Crosse Kansas slope failure expert witnessLa Crosse Kansas construction claims expert witnessLa Crosse Kansas ada design expert witnessLa Crosse Kansas eifs expert witnessLa Crosse Kansas fenestration expert witnessLa Crosse Kansas architecture expert witnessLa Crosse Kansas construction safety expert
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Consultant Builders Information
    La Crosse, 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.


    Building Consultant Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines La Crosse Kansas

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


    Building Consultant Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    McPherson Area Contractors Association
    Local # 1735
    PO Box 38
    McPherson, KS 67460
    La Crosse Kansas Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Salina
    Local # 1750
    2125 Crawford Place
    Salina, KS 67401

    La Crosse Kansas Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Lawrence Home Builders Association
    Local # 1723
    PO Box 3490
    Lawrence, KS 66046

    La Crosse Kansas Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Hutchinson
    Local # 1720
    PO Box 2209
    Hutchinson, KS 67504

    La Crosse Kansas Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Topeka Home Builders Association
    Local # 1765
    1505 SW Fairlawn Rd
    Topeka, KS 66604

    La Crosse Kansas Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Kansas Home Builders Association
    Local # 1700
    212 SW 8th Ave Ste 201
    Topeka, KS 66603

    La Crosse Kansas Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Flint Hills Area Builders Association
    Local # 1726
    2601 Anderson Ave Ste 207
    Manhattan, KS 66502

    La Crosse Kansas Building Consultant 10/ 10


    Building Consultant News and Information
    For La Crosse Kansas


    Houses Can Still Make Cents: Illinois’ Implied Warranty of Habitability

    Disappointment on an Olympian Scale After Rio 2016 Summer Games

    Court Rules in Favor of Treasure Island Developers in Environmental Case

    Comparing Contracts: A Review of the AIA 201 and ConsensusDocs - Part II

    Hunton Andrews Kurth Associate Cary D. Steklof Selected to Florida Trend’s Legal Elite Up & Comers List for 2019

    Excess Insurer On The Hook For Cleanup Costs At Seven Industrial Sites

    Wall Street Journal Analyzes the Housing Market Direction

    Court Rejects Insurer's Argument That Two Triggers Required

    Architects and Engineers Added to Harmon Towers Lawsuit

    Tall and Sustainable Is Not an Easy Fix

    CRH to Buy Building-Products Firm Laurence for $1.3 Billion

    How To Lock Disputes Out Of Your Project In Construction

    Wendel Rosen Attorneys Named as Fellows of the Construction Lawyers Society of America

    Grad Student Sues UC Santa Cruz over Mold in Residence

    Lawsuits over Roof Dropped

    Builder Pipeline in U.S. at Eight-Year High: Under the Hood

    Insured’s Bad Faith Insurance Claim Evaporates Before its Eyes

    Connecticut Supreme Court Further Refines Meaning of "Collapse"

    24th Annual West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar A Success

    Just When You Thought the Green Building Risk Discussion Was Over. . .

    A Sample Itinerary to get the Most out of West Coast Casualty’s Construction Defect Seminar

    KONE is Shaking Up the Industry with BIM

    Bert L. Howe & Associates Brings Professional Development Series to Their Houston Office

    How to Determine the Deadline for Recording a California Mechanics Lien

    Hamptons Home Up for Foreclosure That May Set Record

    UK's Biggest Construction Show Bans 'Promo Girls'

    Mortgage Bonds Stare Down End of Fed Easing as Gains Persist

    New York’s Highest Court Gives Insurers “an Incentive to Defend”

    The Future Looks Bright for Construction in 2015

    The Biggest Thing Keeping Young Homebuyers out of the Market Isn't Student Debt

    Is It Time to Get Rid of Retainage?

    Thank Your Founding Fathers for Mechanic’s Liens

    Got Licensing Questions? CSLB Licensing Workshop November 17th and December 15th

    Crime Policy Insurance Quotes Falsely Represented the Scope of its Coverage

    Social Distancing and the Impact on Service of Process Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic

    Single-Family Home Starts Seen Catching Up to Surging U.S. Sales

    Commercial Construction Lenders Rejoice: The Pennsylvania Legislature Provides a Statutory fix for the “Kessler” Decision

    On to Year Thirteen for Blog

    San Diego’s NFL Stadium Dream Counts on Munis for Chargers’ Home

    California Enacts New Claims Resolution Process for Public Works Projects

    Las Vegas Student Housing Developer Will Name Replacement Contractor

    Utah’s Highest Court Holds That Plaintiffs Must Properly Commence an Action to Rely on the Relation-Back Doctrine to Overcome the Statute of Repose

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

    Client Alert: Disclosure of Plaintiff’s Status as Undocumented Alien to Prospective Jury Panel Grounds for Mistrial

    COVID-19 Response: Key Legal Considerations for Event Cancellations

    AEM Pursuing ISO Standard for Earthmoving Grade-Control Data

    EPA Threatens Cut in California's Federal Highway Funds

    Catch 22: “If You’re Moving Dirt, You Need to Control Your Dust” (But Don’t Use Potable Water!)

    Lack of Workers Holding Back Building

    Testimony from Insureds' Expert Limited By Motion In Limine
    Corporate Profile

    LA CROSSE KANSAS BUILDING CONSULTANT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The La Crosse, Kansas Building Consultant Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Consultant News & Info
    La Crosse, Kansas

    Be Proactive, Not Reactive, To Preserve Force Majeure Rights Regarding The Coronavirus

    March 30, 2020 —
    If you are involved in construction, NOW is the time to consider the potential force majeure impacts associated with the pandemic Coronavirus. Things are beginning to drastically change on a minute-by-minute basis. From travel restrictions, to the suspension or cancellation of events on an international level, to company-wide policies and restrictions, the global uncertainty has led to the possibility that a force majeure delay will occur. Thinking otherwise is not being proactive. The Coronavirus, and the impacts / delays associated therewith, is beyond anyone’s control. Due to the uncertainty, it is hard to fathom at this time a reasonable challenge to someone’s reaction to this concern or their companywide response to the concern.
      If you are a contractor, subcontractor, or even a supplier, my suggestions would be as follows:
    1. Revisit your contracts and see what type of force majeure language it has – anything relating to delays beyond your control or epidemics;
    2. Examine to see whether you have a basis for additional compensation AND additional time;
    3. Examine what type of notice you are required to provide for force majeure events;
    4. Be proactive – send notice now of the potentiality that this pandemic can impact / delay the job –no one should take offense to this letter as this pandemic has impacted all walks of life;
    5. If an impact occurs, send follow-up notice accordingly to ensure rights under the contract are preserved; and
    6. For future contracts, incorporate language that specifically addresses epidemics and pandemics now that the occurrence of this issue has become real.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Seven Key Issues for Construction Professionals to Consider When Dealing With COVID-19

    April 13, 2020 —
    By now every construction professional has been inundated with articles regarding the impacts of COVID-19 on the construction industry. The sheer volume of information is overwhelming and changes by the hour. This article is intended to summarize key issues affecting construction professionals and serve as a general road map for navigating the crisis. 1. Determine Project Status The first consideration is whether the construction projects at issue are allowed to proceed given “shelter in place” and related orders. Generally speaking, Governor Newsom has deemed construction to be essential and, therefore, exempt from California’s “Safer at Home” order. There is some debate as to whether the governor’s order takes priority over contradictory local (City and County) orders. For example, some Northern California counties and the City of Berkeley have issued orders expressly providing that their local orders legally supersede the State order because the local orders are more restrictive. If a local ordinance, public entity representative, or the project owner orders the project to shut down, the parties will need to make a fact specific determination regarding how to proceed at that time. If the project proceeds, employee safety is paramount. In the City of Los Angeles employers are required to develop a “comprehensive COVID-19 exposure control plan” that includes a laundry list of safety requirements. Regardless of the jurisdiction, the parties must err on the side of caution and comply with social distancing (six feet), refrain from holding meetings, and close the project to the public. Anyone who can work remotely should be encouraged to do so. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason Adams, Gibbs Giden
    Mr. Adams may be contacted at jadams@gibbsgiden.com

    Subcontractors Found Liable to Reimburse Insurer Defense Costs in Equitable Subrogation Action

    August 03, 2020 —
    In Pulte Home Corp. v. CBR Electric, Inc. (No. E068353, filed 6/10/20), a California appeals court reversed the denial of an equitable subrogation claim for reimbursement of defense costs from contractually obligated subcontractors to a defending insurer, finding that all of the elements for equitable subrogation were met, and the equities tipped in favor of the insurer. After defending the general contractor, Pulte, in two construction defect actions as an additional insured on a subcontractor’s policy, St. Paul sought reimbursement of defense costs solely on an equitable subrogation theory against six subcontractors that had worked on the underlying construction projects, and whose subcontracts required them to defend Pulte in suits related to their work. After a bench trial, the trial court denied St. Paul’s claim, concluding that St. Paul had not demonstrated that it was fair to shift all of the defense costs to the subcontractors because their failure to defend Pulte had not caused the homeowners to bring the construction defect actions. The appeals court reversed, holding that the trial court misconstrued the law governing equitable subrogation. Because the relevant facts were not in dispute, the appeals court reviewed the case de novo and found that the trial court committed error in its denial of reimbursement for the defense fees. The appeals court found two errors: First, the trial court incorrectly concluded that equitable subrogation requires shifting of the entire loss. Second, the trial court applied a faulty causation analysis – that because the non-defending subcontractors had not caused the homeowners to sue Pulte, thereby necessitating a defense, St. Paul could not meet the elements of equitable subrogation. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Solutions To 4 Common Law Firm Diversity Challenges

    April 27, 2020 —
    Minority attorneys continue to depart law firms at a higher rate than those in the majority and continue to be substantially underrepresented at the partner level. With the continued demands of clients and other organizations to improve diversity, law firms need to embrace new and creative solutions. To address the concern, the California Minority Counsel Program, or CMCP, held an interactive workshop in February for members to brainstorm and develop solutions to specific diversity challenges and share them with their peers. This was a rare occasion for attorneys to be able to discuss real issues they are facing in their firms and to develop a potential road map to success as opposed to listening to a panel discussion followed by the usual Q&A session. Payne & Fears LLP is a member of CMCP, so our firm had the opportunity to participate in this workshop. Law firm leaders and HR professionals may want to pay particular attention to the suggestions outlined in this article as their firms strive to diversify. The topics can be uncomfortable, but if not addressed, the problem of underrepresentation will continue to spread. Many of these ideas do not cost much in the way of money, but they do require time and commitment to change. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Alexandra DeFelice, Payne & Fears
    Ms. DeFelice may be contacted at adefelice@paynefears.com

    Five Reasons to Hire Older Workers—and How to Keep Them

    July 06, 2020 —
    The economic downturn in 2008 created a black hole of talent in the construction industry. As a result, finding project managers between the ages of 28 and 33 and superintendents between the ages of 23 and 30 in today’s market can be difficult, if not impossible in some cases. To make up for this gap in available talent, construction executives are going to have to look to project managers and superintendents in the 58-to-64 age range. Fortunately, there are numerous benefits to hiring older workers. 1. OLDER WORKERS WANT TO MENTOR THE NEXT GENERATION. This is their most significant benefit: the older generation truly enjoys teaching younger construction workers and passing on skills and knowledge, while also getting to do a job they’re good at. This means investing in one experienced worker today can pay dividends for the quality of a company’s workforce for decades to come, as mentorship programs have proven to increase the skills and loyalty of younger workers. If a company wants someone with deep knowledge and broad experience to help mold the next generation of construction workers, they should hire an older employee. Reprinted courtesy of Charlie Kimmel, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Denied

    June 29, 2020 —
    The court found there was no coverage for the insureds' alleged negligent failure to construct a building. Evanston Ins. Co. v. DCM Contracting, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63977 (N.D. Ga. Feb. 28, 2020). Turning Point Church sued DCM Contracting for faulty workmanship on a construction project. Turning Point sent a demand letter to DCM on August 18, 2017 and filed suit in December. Evanston did not receive notice of Turning Point's claims and the lawsuit until May 15, 2018. Evanston filed suit for a declaratory judgment and moved for summary judgment. The court first considered the late notice. The policy required notice "as soon as practicable" DCM was also required to provide copies of demands, notices, or legal papers to Evanston. Here, DCM did not give notice to Evanston until nine months after receipt of Turning Point's demand. A phone communication with DCM's agent between August 2017 and May 2018 was insufficient. DCM provided no documents, including the summons and complaint, to the agent. DCM waited five months to forward the underlying lawsuit. This was a breach of the policy. 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 te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Sometimes You Just Need to Call it a Day: Court Finds That Contractor Not Entitled to Recover Costs After Public Works Contract is Invalidated

    June 29, 2020 —
    January was a tough month in the courts for Hensel Phelps Construction Company. Hot off the heels of Hensel Phelps Construction Co. v. Superior Court, a case concerning the 10-year statute of limitations under Civil Code section 941, comes Hensel Phelps Construction Co. v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Case No. B293427 (January 28, 2020), a bid dispute case . . . The Tale of a Bid, a Bid Protest, and Two Cases A. The Bid and Bid Protest On March 15, 2015, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) issues an Invitation for Bid for the HVAC project at the Ironwood State Prison. The deadline to submit bids was April 30, 2015. Hensel Phelps Construction Co. submitted a timely bid and was determined to be the “apparent low bidder” with a bid of $88,160,000. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    SB 939 Proposes Moratorium On Unlawful Detainer Actions For Commercial Tenants And Allows Tenants Who Can't Renegotiate Their Lease In Good Faith To Terminate Their Lease Without Liability

    June 01, 2020 —
    SB 939 is currently working its way through the Senate Judiciary Committee. The legislation would impose new obligations on landlords, and provide protections for commercial tenants who meet specified criteria. SB 939 would impose a moratorium on eviction of those qualified commercial tenants while emergency COVID-19 orders are in effect. Any eviction actions commenced after the date of the emergency COVID-19 order, but before the adoption of SB 939, would be void and unenforceable. The Senate Judiciary Committee has scheduled a hearing for SB 939 on May 22, 2020, at 9:00 a.m. Who qualifies as a commercial tenant under SB 939? To qualify under this legislation, a commercial tenant must be a business that operates primarily in California. The commercial tenant must be a small business, nonprofit, an eating or drinking establishment, place of entertainment, or performance venue. Publicly traded companies or any company owned by, or affiliated with a publicly traded company, do not qualify. The commercial tenant must have experienced a decline of at least 40 percent monthly revenue, either as compared to two months before the emergency COVID-19 order, or other local government shelter-in-place orders took effect, or as compared to the same month in 2019. If the commercial tenant is an eating or drinking establishment, place of entertainment, or performance venue, the commercial tenant must also show a decline of 25 percent or more in capacity due to social or physical distancing orders or safety concerns, and show that it is subject to regulations to prevent the spread of COVID-19 that will financially impair the business when compared to the period before the emergency COVID-19 order or other local shelter-in-place orders took effect. What eviction actions are prohibited while emergency COVID-19 orders are in effect? If adopted, SB 939 would add Section 1951.9 to the Civil Code. This section would make it unlawful to terminate a tenancy, serve notice to terminate a tenancy, use lockout or utility shutoff actions to terminate a tenancy or otherwise evict a tenant of commercial real property, including a business or nonprofit, during the pendency of the COVID-19 emergency order proclaimed by Governor Newsome on March 4, 2020. Exceptions apply if a tenant poses a threat to the property, other tenants or a person, business or other entity. Any violations of this eviction prohibition would be against public policy and unenforceable. Any eviction started after proclamation of the state of emergency but before the effective date is deemed void, against public policy and is unenforceable. Does SB 939 impose new penalties or remedies? Any landlord who harasses, mistreats or retaliates against a commercial tenant to force the tenant to abrogate the lease would be subject to a fine of $2,000 for each violation. Further, any such violation would be an unlawful business practice and an act of unfair competition under Section 17200 of the Business and Professions Code and would be subject to all available remedies or penalties for those actions under state law. When is a commercial tenant required to pay unpaid rent due to COVID-19? If a commercial tenant fails to pay rent during the emergency COVID-19 order, the sum total of the past due rent must be paid within 12 months following the date of the end of the emergency proclamation, unless the commercial tenant has successfully negotiated an agreement with its landlord to pay the outstanding rent at a later date. Nonpayment of rent during the state of emergency cannot be used as grounds for eviction. Notwithstanding lease terms to the contrary, landlords may not impose late charges for rent that became due during the state of emergency. Are landlords required to provide notice of protections adopted under SB 939? Landlords would be required to provide notice to commercial tenants of the protections offered under SB 939 within 30 days of the effective date. SB 939 does not preempt local legislation or ordinances restricting the same or similar conduct which impose a more severe penalty for the same conduct. Local legislation or ordinances may impose additional notice requirements. Does SB 939 impose new protections for commercial tenants when negotiating lease modifications? If enacted, SB 939 would permit commercial tenants to open negotiations for new lease terms, and provide commercial tenants the ability to terminate the lease if those negotiations fail. A commercial tenant who wishes to modify its commercial lease, may engage in good faith negotiations with its landlord to modify any rent or economic requirement regardless of the term remaining on the lease. The commercial tenant must serve a notice on the landlord certifying that it meets the required criteria, along with the desired modifications. If the commercial tenant and landlord do not reach a mutually satisfactory agreement within 30 days, then within 10 days, the commercial tenant may terminate the lease without any liability for future rent, fees, or costs that otherwise may have been due under the lease by providing a written termination notice to the landlord. The commercial tenant would be required to pay previously due rent, in an amount no greater than the sum of the following: (1) the actual rent due during the emergency COVID-19 order, or a maximum of three months of the past due rent during that period, and (2) all rent incurred and unpaid during a time unrelated to the emergency COVID-19 order through the date of the termination notice. The payment is due within 12 months from date of the termination notice. The commercial tenant would be required to vacate the premises within 14 days of the landlord's receipt of the termination notice. Upon service of the notice, any lease, and any third party guaranties of the lease would terminate. If the landlord and commercial tenant reach an agreement to modify the lease, the commercial tenant would not have the option to later terminate the lease under this provision. When is the next Senate Judiciary Committee Meeting for SB 939? The Senate Judiciary Committee set a hearing for SB 939 on May 22, 2020 at 9:00 a.m. The Senate will livestream the hearing on its website at www.sen.ca.gov. Public comments or testimony may be submitted in writing to the Judiciary Committee by emailing Erica.porter@sen.ca.gov. Alternatively, the public may participate via telephone during the public comment period. Any changes to the Judicial Committee schedule may be found at: https://www.senate.ca.gov/calendar. Newmeyer Dillion continues to follow COVID-19 and its impact on your business and our communities. Feel free to reach out to us at NDcovid19response@ndlf.com or visit us at www.newmeyerdillion.com/covid-19-multidisciplinary-task-force/. Rhonda Kreger is Senior Counsel on Newmeyer Dillion's transactional team at our Newport Beach office. Her practice focuses on all aspects of commercial real estate law, with a particular emphasis on the representation of residential developers, merchant builders and institutional investors. You can reach Rhonda at rhonda.kreger@ndlf.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of