• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Isabel Kansas Medical building building expert Isabel Kansas landscaping construction building expert Isabel Kansas high-rise construction building expert Isabel Kansas hospital construction building expert Isabel Kansas casino resort building expert Isabel Kansas industrial building building expert Isabel Kansas Subterranean parking building expert Isabel Kansas institutional building building expert Isabel Kansas condominium building expert Isabel Kansas concrete tilt-up building expert Isabel Kansas office building building expert Isabel Kansas mid-rise construction building expert Isabel Kansas multi family housing building expert Isabel Kansas townhome construction building expert Isabel Kansas structural steel construction building expert Isabel Kansas parking structure building expert Isabel Kansas condominiums building expert Isabel Kansas custom home building expert Isabel Kansas retail construction building expert Isabel Kansas low-income housing building expert Isabel Kansas tract home building expert Isabel Kansas
    Isabel Kansas delay claim expert witnessIsabel Kansas engineering consultantIsabel Kansas expert witness roofingIsabel Kansas civil engineer expert witnessIsabel Kansas expert witness commercial buildingsIsabel Kansas construction defect expert witnessIsabel Kansas construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Expert Builders Information
    Isabel, 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 Expert Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Isabel Kansas

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

    Building Expert Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Wichita Area Builders Association
    Local # 1780
    730 N Main St
    Wichita, KS 67203

    Isabel Kansas Building Expert 10/ 10

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

    Isabel Kansas Building Expert 10/ 10

    McPherson Area Contractors Association
    Local # 1735
    PO Box 38
    McPherson, KS 67460
    Isabel Kansas Building Expert 10/ 10

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

    Isabel Kansas Building Expert 10/ 10

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

    Isabel Kansas Building Expert 10/ 10

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

    Isabel Kansas Building Expert 10/ 10

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

    Isabel Kansas Building Expert 10/ 10

    Building Expert News and Information
    For Isabel Kansas

    Amendments to California Insurance Code to Require Enhanced Claims Handling Requirements for Claims Arising Out Of Catastrophic Events

    Indictments Issued in Las Vegas HOA Scam

    Scary Movie: Theatre Developer Axed By Court of Appeal In Prevailing Wage Determination Challenge

    Blackstone to Buy Chicago’s Willis Tower for $1.3 Billion

    Taking Care of Infrastructure – Interview with Marilyn Grabowski

    Faulty Workmanship an Occurrence in Iowa – as Long as Other Property Damage is Involved

    Arbitration—No Opportunity for Appeal

    City of Pawtucket Considering Forensic Investigation of Tower

    How Long does a Florida Condo Association Have to File a Construction Defect Claim?

    White and Williams Earns National "Best Law Firm" Rankings from US News

    Avoiding 'E-trouble' in Construction Litigation

    Give Way or Yield? The Jurisdiction of Your Contract Does Matter! (Law note)

    Don MacGregor of Bert L. Howe & Associates Awarded Silver Star Award at WCC Construction Defect Seminar

    Quick Note: Attorney’s Fees and the Significant Issues Test

    California’s Housing Costs Endanger Growth, Analyst Says

    Pulled from the Swamp: EPA Wetland Determination Now Judicially Reviewable

    California Builders’ Right To Repair Is Alive

    Homebuilding Still on the Rise

    UConn’s Law-School Library Construction Case Settled for Millions

    Construction May Begin with Documents, but It Shouldn’t End That Way

    Musk Says ‘Chicago Express’ Tunnel Project Could Start Work in Months

    Environmental Law Violations: When you Should Hire a Lawyer

    The Latest News on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

    Construction Defect Suit Can Continue Against Plumber

    North Carolina Soil & Groundwater Case to be Heard by U.S. Supreme Court

    DHS Awards Contracts for Border Wall Prototypes

    Jean Nouvel’s NYC ‘Vision Machine’ Sued Over Construction Defects

    Harlem Developers Reach Deal with Attorney General

    2013 May Be Bay Area’s Best Year for Commercial Building

    U.S., Canada, Mexico Set New Joint Clean-Energy Goal

    U.S. Tornadoes, Hail Cost Insurers $1 Billion in June

    Are COVID-19 Claims Covered by Builders Risk Insurance Policies?

    Delay In Noticing Insurer of Loss is Not Prejudicial

    The Anatomy of a Construction Dispute Stage 3- The Last Straw

    Motion to Dismiss Denied Regarding Insureds' Claim For Collapse

    How to Protect the High-Tech Home

    Insurance Lawyers Recognized by JD Supra 2020 Readers' Choice Awards

    Insurance Agent Sued for Lapse in Coverage after House Collapses

    Ohio School Board and Contractor Meet to Discuss Alleged Defects

    Hunton Insurance Team Wins Summary Judgment on Firm’s Own Hurricane Harvey Business Income Loss

    CCPA Class Action Lawsuits Are Coming. Are You Ready?

    Rhode Island District Court Dismisses Plaintiff’s Case for Spoliation Due to Potential Unfair Prejudice to Defendant

    How Algorithmic Design Improves Collaboration in Building Design

    Carroll Brock of Larchmont Homes Dies at Age 88

    Court Rules Planned Development of Banning Ranch May Proceed

    Update: Lawyers Can Be Bound to Confidentiality Provision in Settlement Agreement

    Bad Faith Claim For Independent Contractor's Reduced Loss Assessment Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Bremer Whyte Congratulates Nicole Nuzzo on OCBA Professionalism and Ethics Committee Appointment

    Be Sure to Dot All of the “I’s” and Cross the “T’s” in Virginia

    Construction Cybercrime Is On the Rise
    Corporate Profile


    The Isabel, Kansas Building Expert 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. Drawing from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Isabel'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 Expert News & Info
    Isabel, Kansas

    CDJ’s #10 Topic of the Year: Transport Insurance Company v. Superior Court (2014) 222 Cal.App.4th 1216.

    December 31, 2014 —
    Richard H. Glucksman, Jon Turigliatto, and Kacey R. Riccomini of Chapman Glucksman Dean Roeb & Barger analyzed Transport and wrote, “The decision is an important tool for builders’ counsel because the builder’s reasonable expectations can alter the interpretation of ambiguous terms in policies issued to subcontractors. Essentially, the builder’s intent is relevant to the interpretation of policy terms because the subcontractor’s intent in requesting additional coverage depends on the agreement it made with the builder.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    AFL-CIO Joins in $10 Billion Infrastructure Plan

    June 30, 2011 —

    The AFL-CIO has announced plans to generate up to $10 billion in funding for infrastructure development, training construction workers, and making buildings more energy efficient, pledging $20 million to retrofit buildings. Bloomberg News reports that union officials made the announcement in Chicago at the Clinton Global Initiative, releasing a statement from Richard Trumka, president of the union, “we, at the AFL-CIO, believe that together, with our partners in business and government, we can profitably invest significant resources to make America more competitive and energy efficient.” A foot injury prevented Mr. Trumka from attending the event.

    The statement also quoted Mark Ayers, president of the Building and Construction Trades Department of the AFL-CIO, “the time is now to become intensely focused on the creation of jobs.”

    Read the full story…

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Pinnacle Controls in Verano

    February 21, 2013 —
    The California Court of Appeals has applied the California Supreme Court’s recent Pinnacle decision to a new case, Verano Condominium Association v. La Cima Development. As in Pinnacle, La Cima sought to compel arbitration of construction defect claims with a homeowners association. The trial court denied La Cima’s attempt to compel arbitration on the grounds that the arbitration agreement was made with the individual homeowners and not the homeowners association. Further, it was determined that the CC&Rs “were unenforceable due to unconscionability.” La Cima appealed, and the appeals court affirmed in part and reversed in part. After Pinnacle, La Cima sought a review. The Supreme Court of California directed the appeals court to vacate their earlier decision and reconsider, based on Pinnacle. The Fourth Circuit Court has concluded that this conflicted with the ruling in Pinnacle. There, as in Verano, homeowners signed agreements that disputes with the developer would be settled through binding arbitration. The appeals court had found for the community association, but on review, the California Supreme Court reversed this decision. The California Court of Appeals had two issue to consider in this review: whether the arbitration provisions applied to the homeowners association, and whether these provisions were unconscionable. The court concluded that “in light of Pinnacle it is clear the arbitration provisions set forth in the Verano CC&Rs constitute a valid agreement to arbitrate.” On the second question, the Verano CC&Rs were described by the court as “materially indistinguishable” from those in the earlier case. As the state Supreme Court found that those were not unconscionable, clearly neither were these. The case was remanded for further proceedings and La Cima is entitled to recover the costs of the appeal. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Coverage Established for Property Damage Caused by Added Product

    April 28, 2014 —
    Applying Minnesota law, the federal district court determined the supplier of contaminated dried milk had coverage. The Netherlands Ins. Co. v. Main Street Ingredients, LLC, 2014 WL 1012793 (8th Cir. March 18, 2014). In 2007, Plainview Milk Products sold dried milk to Main Street Ingredients, LLC, who then sold the dried milk to Malt-O-Meal. The dried milk was used by Malt-O-Meal in its instant oatmeal products. In June 2009, the FDA found Salmonella bacteria at Plainview's plant. The FDA also observed thirteen instances of insanitary conditions in the plant. Plainview issued a product recall notice announcing a "voluntary recall" of dried milk, stating its dried milk had "the potential to be contaminated with Salmonella." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at

    Proving Impacts to Critical Path to Defeat Liquidated Damages Assessment

    December 16, 2019 —
    When a contractor is staring down the barrel of an owner’s assessment of liquidated damages, the burden will fall on the contractor to establish that the delay was attributable to the owner and the owner’s agents. The contractor will want to do this not only to defeat the assessment of liquidated damages, but because it will want to establish that the delay caused it to incur extended field overhead (general conditions) for which the owner is responsible. A contractor supports its burden by proving the impacts to its critical path. “In general, proving an allegation of government-caused delays without a means of showing the critical path is a steep prospect.” James Talcott Construction v. U.S., 2019 WL 1040383, *8 (Fed. Cl. 2019) (unreported opinion) (finding that because contractor did NOT present a critical path analysis it could not support its claim for delay caused by the government). Avoiding the assessment of liquidated damages means the contractor needs to support that it encountered excusable delay and it is/was entitled to an extension of time to complete the project. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at

    Subcontractors Have a Duty to Clarify Ambiguities in Bid Documents

    August 19, 2015 —
    Several months ago, I wrote about an escalator subcontractor that sued a general contractor, demanding payment for work completed based on approved shop drawings. The trial court agreed with the subcontractor, but the general contractor appealed. Ten months later, the Court of Appeals reversed, finding that the subcontractor had a duty to bring to the general contractor’s attention major discrepancies or errors they detect in the bid documents.
    “The subcontractor failed to disclose ambiguities in the plans and must suffer the peril.”
    Construction Difficulties The subcontractor installed 32 inch escalators throughout the project, but the plans called for 40 inch escalators. The general contractor and subcontractor could not reach agreement on how the dispute should be resolved. The subcontractor sued the general to get paid for replacing the escalators and the general sued to subcontractor for concessions it had to pay to the owner. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at

    Builders Can’t Rely on SB800

    October 01, 2013 —
    In coming to their ruling on SB800, the California Court of Appeals looked to the legislative intent behind the law. Valentine Hoy, Timothy Hutter, and Erin Sedloff of Allen Matkins, in an article on the ruling, note that SB800 was written in response to Aas v. Superior Court, in which the court found that there was no remedy for construction defects that had not resulted in property damage. In the latest ruling, Liberty Mutual v. Brookfield Crystal Cove, LLC, the court concluded that SB800 was passed to give homeowners a way to address defects that had not lead to damage. However, the court also concluded that the legislature did not intend for SB800 to be the only remedy. In Liberty Mutual, the insurance company sought reimbursement for claims it had paid on a homeowner’s claim after a fire sprinkler pipe burst. Liberty Mutual had insured the homeowner and sought repayment from the builder. Escrow had closed on the home in 2004, the pipe burst in 2008, and Liberty Mutual filed their claim in 2011, seven years after the close of escrow. But for plumbing issues, SB800 has a four-year statute of limitations. The writers describe California as “a hotbed for construction defect litigation.” Due to the Liberty Mutual ruling, developers now “cannot rely on the statutes of limitation set forth in SB800.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Should I Pull the Pin? Contractor and Subcontractor Termination for Cause

    January 26, 2017 —
    Any owner or general contractor who has a few projects under his or her belt has likely had this thought: “My contractor (or subcontractor) is not performing the way I expected; should I replace him?” The other side of the termination coin is: “This project is not going the way I expected; should I get out?” While there may be an emotional high that immediately comes from terminating a contractor or subcontractor (or leaving a project, in mid-stream), there are many factors to be weighed, before making that decision. Project Delay. Replacing a contractor or subcontractor that has already begun performance always results in delays to the project. Assessing the work in place, interviewing replacement contractors, and negotiating the terms of the new relationship can easily consume weeks, if not months of project time. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick McNamara, Porter Law Group
    Mr. McNamara may be contacted at