BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure Building Consultant Port Heiden Alaska condominiums Building Consultant Port Heiden Alaska condominium Building Consultant Port Heiden Alaska hospital construction Building Consultant Port Heiden Alaska custom home Building Consultant Port Heiden Alaska custom homes Building Consultant Port Heiden Alaska high-rise construction Building Consultant Port Heiden Alaska mid-rise construction Building Consultant Port Heiden Alaska industrial building Building Consultant Port Heiden Alaska institutional building Building Consultant Port Heiden Alaska landscaping construction Building Consultant Port Heiden Alaska concrete tilt-up Building Consultant Port Heiden Alaska multi family housing Building Consultant Port Heiden Alaska retail construction Building Consultant Port Heiden Alaska production housing Building Consultant Port Heiden Alaska Subterranean parking Building Consultant Port Heiden Alaska housing Building Consultant Port Heiden Alaska townhome construction Building Consultant Port Heiden Alaska office building Building Consultant Port Heiden Alaska tract home Building Consultant Port Heiden Alaska Medical building Building Consultant Port Heiden Alaska structural steel construction Building Consultant Port Heiden Alaska
    Port Heiden Alaska construction expert witness public projectsPort Heiden Alaska stucco expert witnessPort Heiden Alaska concrete expert witnessPort Heiden Alaska construction expertsPort Heiden Alaska engineering consultantPort Heiden Alaska defective construction expertPort Heiden Alaska expert witness commercial buildings
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Consultant Builders Information
    Port Heiden, 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.


    Building Consultant Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Port Heiden Alaska

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required


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

    Port Heiden Alaska Building Consultant 10/ 10

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

    Port Heiden Alaska Building Consultant 10/ 10

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

    Port Heiden Alaska Building Consultant 10/ 10

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

    Port Heiden Alaska Building Consultant 10/ 10

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

    Port Heiden Alaska Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Mat-Su Home Builders Association
    Local # 0230
    609 S KNIK GOOSE BAY RD STE G
    Wasilla, AK 99654

    Port Heiden Alaska Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Interior Alaska Builders Association
    Local # 0235
    938 Aspen Street
    Fairbanks, AK 99709

    Port Heiden Alaska Building Consultant 10/ 10


    Building Consultant News and Information
    For Port Heiden Alaska


    Eleven WSHB Attorneys Honored on List of 2016 Rising Stars

    Arizona Supreme Court Leaves Limits on Construction Defects Unclear

    The U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals Rules on Greystone

    Insurer Must Defend Claims of Negligence and Private Nuisance

    Workers Hurt in Casino Floor Collapse

    Everyone’s Working From Home Due to the Coronavirus – Is There Insurance Coverage for a Data Breach?

    “Bee” Careful: Unique Considerations When Negotiating a Bee Storage Lease Agreement

    Hawaii Supreme Court Finds Excess Can Sue Primary for Equitable Subrogation

    Limiting Liability: Three Clauses to Consider in your Next Construction Contract

    Court Confirms No Duty to Reimburse for Prophylactic Repairs Prior to Actual Collapse

    Insurance Tips for Contractors

    Is Construction in Arizona Back to Normal?

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

    2018 Super Bowl US. Bank Stadium in Minneapolis

    Construction Defect Headaches Can Be Avoided

    South Carolina “occurrence” and allocation

    Ohio Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Burlingame Construction Defect Case Heading to Trial

    Record-Setting Construction in Fargo

    Ten Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Selected to the Best Lawyers in America© 2019

    California Supreme Court Rules Developers can be Required to Include Affordable Housing

    MDL Panel Grants Consolidation for One Group of COVID-19 Claims

    A Call to Washington: Online Permitting Saves Money and the Environment

    Quick Note: Lis Pendens Bond When Lis Pendens Not Founded On Recorded Instrument Or Statute

    The 2017 ASCDC and CDCMA Construction Defect Seminar and Holiday Reception

    Risk Protection: Force Majeure Agreements Take on Renewed Relevance

    Approaches in the Absence of a Differing Site Conditions Clause

    Buy American Under President Trump: What to Know and Where We’re Heading

    Settlement Reached in California Animal Shelter Construction Defect Case

    EEOC Suit Alleges Site Managers Bullied Black Workers on NY Project

    SDNY Vacates Arbitration Award for Party-Arbitrator’s Nondisclosures

    Will Superusers Future-Proof the AEC Industry?

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Allegations of Collapse Rejected

    Jet Crash Blamed on Runway Construction Defect

    Construction Defects Claims Can Be Limited by Contract Says Washington Court

    Bad Faith Claim for Inadequate Investigation Does Not Survive Summary Judgment

    Construction Defect Bill Introduced in California

    More Business Value from Drones with Propeller and Trimble – Interview with Rory San Miguel

    Time to Update Your Virginia Mechanic’s Lien Forms (July 1, 2019)

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

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

    Statute of Limitations Upheld in Construction Defect Case

    With VA Mechanic’s Liens Sometimes “Substantial Compliance” is Enough (but don’t count on it) [UPDATE]

    Florida Representative Wants to Change Statute of Repose

    Staying the Course, Texas Supreme Court Rejects Insurer’s Argument for Exception to Eight-Corners Rule in Determining Duty to Defend

    Crane Dangles and So Do Insurance Questions

    Lien Claimant’s Right to Execute against Bond Upheld in Court of Appeals

    Drones, Googleplexes and Hyperloops

    Hawaii State Senate Requires CGL Carriers to Submit Premium Information To State Legislature

    U.S. Home Prices Climbed 0.1% in July as Gains Slowed
    Corporate Profile

    PORT HEIDEN ALASKA BUILDING CONSULTANT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Port Heiden, Alaska Building Consultant Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 7,000 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Drawing from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Port Heiden'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.

    Building Consultant News & Info
    Port Heiden, Alaska

    Construction Contracts Need Amending Post COVID-19 Shutdowns

    October 19, 2020 —
    No one could have expected the coronavirus pandemic in the beginning of 2020. True, there were rumblings about a sickness in China that was highly contagious and infecting many people. Death tolls began rising as the world watched in disbelieve. After all, this is 2020. This is not supposed to happen. We should have been able to control the spread of the virus, but we could not. COVID-19 quickly spread throughout the world causing havoc and economic despair. While some sectors of the construction industry are not as impacted as others, contractors industry-wide need to consider how COVID-19 will impact their contractual obligations. Depending on what happens and what the government decides to do to stop the spread of the coronavirus, project delays, supply chain distributions, lost productivity and work stoppages may continue for months. All of this will impact the contracts that contractors have with owners. Contractors may not be able to preform according to the terms of the contract through no fault of their own. Owners may no longer qualify for the financing needed to pay for the project. FORCE MAJEURE According to Investopedia, “force majeure refers to a clause that is included in contracts to remove liability for natural and unavoidable catastrophes that interrupt the expected course of events and prevent participants from fulfilling obligations.” Reprinted courtesy of Richard P. Higgins, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Higgins may be contacted at Richard.Higgins@MCC-CPAs.com

    Genuine Dispute Summary Judgment Reversed for Abuse of Discretion and Trial of Fact Questions About Expert Opinions

    July 27, 2020 —
    In Fadeeff v. State Farm General Ins. Co. (No. A155691, filed 5/22/20 ord. pub. 6/8/20), a California appeals court held that triable issues of fact and the trial court’s failure to address a request for a continuance precluded summary judgment for an insurer under the genuine dispute doctrine. In Fadeeff, the policyholders made a claim to State Farm for smoke damage to their home from the 2015 Valley Fire in Hidden Valley Lake, California. With State Farm’s approval, the insureds retained the restoration company, ServPro, to assist with smoke and soot mitigation. State Farm documented smoke and soot on the interior walls, ceilings and carpeting, and on all exterior elevations, including on the deck and handrail. State Farm made a series of payments on the claim totaling about $50,000. The insureds then hired a public adjuster and submitted supplemental claims for further dwelling repairs and additional contents replacement, totaling approximately $75,000. State Farm responded by using its own independent adjuster to investigate, who was neither licensed as an adjuster, nor as a contractor. State Farm also retained forensic consultants for the structure and the HVAC system, but neither the independent adjuster nor the consultants were aware that State Farm had an internal operation guide for the use of third-party experts in handling first party claims, which guidelines were therefore not followed. In addition, the consultants made allegedly superficial inspections, with one attributing smoke and soot damage to other sources of combustion, including the insureds’ exterior propane barbecue, an internal wood fireplace and wood stove and candles that had been burned in the living room. None of the consultants asked the insureds when they had last used any of the sources of combustion. 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

    EEOC Suit Alleges Site Managers Bullied Black Workers on NY Project

    June 15, 2020 —
    Bullying, threats and racial slurs detail alleged “hostile” working conditions for black employees at a now complete cement plant modernization project near Albany, N.Y., in a lawsuit filed June 2 by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission against CCC Group Inc., a San Antonio, Texas-based general contractor. Emell D. Adolphus, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    DOD Contractors Receive Reprieve on Implementation of Chinese Telecommunications Ban

    September 14, 2020 —
    In our previous alert, we discussed the expansion on the Section 889(a)(1)(B) ban on certain Chinese telecommunications equipment and services to contractors and subcontractors who use the equipment and services in their internal operations. Effective August 13, 2020, federal agencies were prohibited from procuring, obtaining, extending, or renewing a contract with a contractor that uses equipment, systems, or services that use covered telecommunications equipment or services as a substantial or essential component or as critical technology, unless an exception applies or a waiver is granted. Since then we have received feedback from contractors, complaining about the difficulties in determining whether their internal operations use covered telecommunications equipment and services and the need for additional time to become compliant or even obtain enough information to submit a waiver request. Now it seems that Department of Defense (DoD) contractors and subcontractors may be getting a temporary reprieve. The DoD Under Secretary for Acquisition and Sustainment requested a waiver that would allow DoD to continue to execute procurement actions providing supplies, equipment, services, food, clothing, transportation, care, and support necessary to execute the DoD mission. The Director of National Intelligence granted the temporary waiver until September 30, 2020 pending a further review of waiver request. Depending upon the outcome of this additional review, the temporary waiver may be continued beyond September 30, 2020 if it is in the national security interests of the United States. Reprinted courtesy of Lori Ann Lange, Peckar & Abramson and Sabah Petrov, Peckar & Abramson Ms. Lange may be contacted at llange@pecklaw.com Ms. Petrov may be contacted at spetrov@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Federal Court Holds That Other Insurance Analysis Is Unnecessary If Policies Cover Different Risks

    September 28, 2020 —
    In Greater Mutual Insurance Company v. Continental Casualty Company, 2020 WL 5370419 (S.D.N.Y. September 8, 2020), the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York had occasion to consider the “other insurance” provisions of a commercial general liability policy, issued by Greater Mutual Insurance Company (“GNY”), and a directors and officers (“D&O”) policy, issued by Continental, to the same insured. The GNY policy covered, inter alia, property damage caused by an occurrence, as well as “personal advertising injury,” defined to include “[t]he wrongful eviction from, wrongful entry into, or invasion of the right of private occupancy of a room, dwelling or premises that a person occupies, committed by or on behalf of its owner, landlord or lessor.” The Continental D&O policy covered claims for wrongful acts, including “wrongful entry or eviction, or other invasion of the right to private occupancy. . . .” Unlike the GNY policy, however, the Continental policy expressly excluded coverage for damage to tangible property. In the underlying action, the plaintiffs alleged that the insured engaged in construction work to fix a leak from a terrace on the seventeenth floor. In doing so, the insured accessed the plaintiffs’ roof terrace. The plaintiffs alleged that the construction workers installed and stored construction materials on the roof terrace, making the plaintiffs unable to access the terrace. Plaintiffs also alleged that their deck furniture may have suffered damage, and that the workers had a “direct line of sight” into their unit, resulting in the plaintiffs having to leave their unit frequently. Causes of action were for property damage, constructive eviction, partial constructive eviction, and invasion of privacy. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Rokuson, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Rokuson may be contacted at crokuson@tlsslaw.com

    Accounting for Payments on Projects Became Even More Crucial This Year

    September 21, 2020 —
    I discussed several of the statutory changes affecting the construction industry here at Construction Law Musings in the run-up to July 1, 2020. One of those changes, an amendment to Virginia Code Section 43-13, may add another arrow to the collection quiver of subcontractors and suppliers. As part of the previously-linked rundown, I highlighted one of the big additions in 2020, namely the amendment making those pesky clauses that let those up the payment chain from you hold money on “this or any other project” void as against public policy. The other big addition to 43-13 is the change that adds a possible civil cause of action for downstream and unpaid subcontractors and suppliers in the event that funds paid to a general contractor or subcontractor are not first used to pay their downstream contractors and suppliers. Prior to July 1, 2020, this statute provided criminal penalties for such behavior but did not contain the possibility of a civil penalty. The operative language for the change is as follows:
    The use by any such contractor or subcontractor or any officer, director, or employee of such contractor or subcontractor of any moneys paid under the contract before paying all amounts due or to become due for labor performed or material furnished for such building or structure for any other purpose than paying such amounts due on the project shall be prima facie evidence of intent to defraud. Any breach or violation of this section may give rise to a civil cause of action for a party in contract with the general contractor or subcontractor, as appropriate; however, this right does not affect a contractor’s or subcontractor’s right to withhold payment for failure to properly perform labor or furnish materials on the project.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    The Power of Planning: Four Key Themes for Mitigating Risk in Construction

    November 09, 2020 —
    Construction is, and always has been, known as a relatively risky business. Whether it is dealing with factors that can be controlled or beyond control, proactively managing risk has proven to be of the most critical factors in delivering quality projects faster, more efficiently and with wider margins. Many people assume on-site activities introduce the greatest amount of uncertainty and potential risk. But many mistakes in construction originate in the planning phase – meaning preconstruction is ripe with opportunity to be the most effective place for mitigating risk, saving money and ultimately broadening margins. There are many ways to mitigate risk before projects even start, but four key themes emerge to be clear, repeatable opportunities for success. DIGITIZE THE PLANNING PHASE Preconstruction is where ideas are brought to life by translating architectural designs into a real, constructible plan. Decisions made at this stage can determine the project’s success and profitability – but it’s far from straightforward. Estimating, scheduling and planning are highly complex activities that depend on constantly changing details and are all areas where missed information or miscommunication can lead to costly rework down the line. Reprinted courtesy of Zac Hays, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Mediation Fails In Federal Lawsuit Seeking Damages From Sureties for Alleged Contract Fraud

    August 17, 2020 —
    After mediation failed, a federal whistle blower lawsuit over alleged fraud against two contractors, which also targets sureties and a surety bond producer, is moving forward. The parties have asked a U.S. district court judge in Washington, D.C. to rule on outstanding motions in preparation for a possible trial. Richard Korman, Engineering News-Record Mr. Korman may be contacted at kormanr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of