• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    multi family housing building expert Nunam Iqua Alaska townhome construction building expert Nunam Iqua Alaska Subterranean parking building expert Nunam Iqua Alaska casino resort building expert Nunam Iqua Alaska concrete tilt-up building expert Nunam Iqua Alaska condominium building expert Nunam Iqua Alaska institutional building building expert Nunam Iqua Alaska low-income housing building expert Nunam Iqua Alaska housing building expert Nunam Iqua Alaska office building building expert Nunam Iqua Alaska condominiums building expert Nunam Iqua Alaska industrial building building expert Nunam Iqua Alaska hospital construction building expert Nunam Iqua Alaska custom home building expert Nunam Iqua Alaska tract home building expert Nunam Iqua Alaska parking structure building expert Nunam Iqua Alaska Medical building building expert Nunam Iqua Alaska mid-rise construction building expert Nunam Iqua Alaska retail construction building expert Nunam Iqua Alaska high-rise construction building expert Nunam Iqua Alaska custom homes building expert Nunam Iqua Alaska landscaping construction building expert Nunam Iqua Alaska
    Nunam Iqua Alaska soil failure expert witnessNunam Iqua Alaska building envelope expert witnessNunam Iqua Alaska structural concrete expertNunam Iqua Alaska construction code expert witnessNunam Iqua Alaska construction expert witnessNunam Iqua Alaska testifying construction expert witnessNunam Iqua Alaska architecture expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Expert Builders Information
    Nunam Iqua, 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 Expert Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Nunam Iqua Alaska

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required

    Building Expert Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Mat-Su Home Builders Association
    Local # 0230
    Wasilla, AK 99654

    Nunam Iqua Alaska Building Expert 10/ 10

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

    Nunam Iqua Alaska Building Expert 10/ 10

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

    Nunam Iqua Alaska Building Expert 10/ 10

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

    Nunam Iqua Alaska Building Expert 10/ 10

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

    Nunam Iqua Alaska Building Expert 10/ 10

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

    Nunam Iqua Alaska Building Expert 10/ 10

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

    Nunam Iqua Alaska Building Expert 10/ 10

    Building Expert News and Information
    For Nunam Iqua Alaska

    Fannie-Freddie Propose Liquidity Rules for Mortgage Insurers

    Coverage Found for Faulty Workmanship Damaging Other Property

    Contractor Sues Yelp Reviewer for Defamation

    Construction Costs Up

    Henderson Land to Spend $839 Million on Hong Kong Retail Complex

    Industry News: New Partner at Burdman Law Group

    Consequential Damages Flowing from Construction Defect Not Covered Under Florida Law

    'Regluing' Oregon State's Showcase for Mass Timber

    Brookfield to Start Manhattan Tower After Signing Skadden

    Update Coverage for Construction Defect Claims in Colorado

    Connecticut Federal District Court Keeps Busy With Collapse Cases

    Pending Sales of U.S. Existing Homes Increase 0.8% in November

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

    KF-103 v. American Family Mutual Insurance: An Exception to the Four Corners Rule

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

    Undocumented Debris at Mississippi Port Sparks Legal Battle

    New Jersey Senate Advances Bad Faith Legislation

    Tropical Storms Pile Up Back-to-Back-to-Back Out West

    Goldman Veteran Said to Buy Mortgages After Big Short

    The Flood Insurance Reform Act May be Extended to 2016

    Indicted Union Representatives Try Again to Revive Enmons

    When is a Residential Subcontractor not Subject to the VCPA? Read to Find Out

    Kahana & Feld P.C. Enhances Client Offerings, Expands Litigation Firm Leadership

    More Regulations for Federal Contractors

    Boston Nonprofit Wants to Put Grown-Ups in Dorms

    New York Building Boom Spurs Corruption Probe After Death

    Construction Industry on the Comeback, But It Won’t Be the Same

    Texas Considers a Quartet of Construction Bills

    Question of Parties' Intent Prevents Summary Judgment for Insurer

    Texas Construction Firm Officials Sentenced in Contract-Fraud Case

    Toxic Drywall Not Covered Under Homeowner’s Policy

    Flood Sublimit Applies, Seawater Corrosion to Amtrak's Equipment Not Ensuing Loss

    Virginia Tech Has Its Own Construction Boom

    Research Institute: A Shared Information Platform Reduces Construction Costs Considerably

    Big League Dreams a Nightmare for Town

    Lakewood Introduced City Ordinance to Battle Colorado’s CD Law

    Diggerland, UK’s Construction Equipment Theme Park, is coming to the U.S.

    Official Tried to Influence Judge against Shortchanged Subcontractor

    Former SNC-Lavalin CEO Now Set for Trial in Bribe Case

    Homeowner Protection Act of 2007 Not Just for Individual Homeowners Anymore?

    Trump Soho May Abandon Condos to Operate Mainly as Hotel

    Construction Law Alert: Appellate Court Rules General Contractors Can Contractually Subordinate Mechanics Lien Rights

    Sierra Pacific v. Bradbury Goes Unchallenged: Colorado’s Six-Year Statute of Repose Begins When a Subcontractor’s Scope of Work Ends

    Economic Damages Cannot be Based On Speculation

    Seattle Council May Take a New Look at Micro-Housing

    "Is the Defective Work Covered by Insurance?"

    Design Professional Liens: A Blueprint

    California’s Right To Repair Act Is The Sole Remedy For Damages For Construction Defects In New Residential Construction

    A Special CDJ Thanksgiving Edition

    Construction Defect Class Action Lawsuit Alleges National Cover-up of Pipe Defects
    Corporate Profile


    Leveraging from more than 5500 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Nunam Iqua, Alaska Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Nunam Iqua's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Nunam Iqua, Alaska

    Legislative Update – The CSLB’s Study Under SB465

    March 22, 2018 —
    Following the tragic Berkeley balcony collapse in 2015, the Legislature enacted California Senate Bill 465 which commissioned the Contractors State License Board (“CSLB” or “Board”) to perform a study regarding the efficacy of having contractors report settlements to the Board. In December 2017 the CSLB released their findings in a report. The ultimate conclusion of the report is to recommend to the Legislature that the ability of the CSLB to protect the public “would be enhanced by regulations requiring licensees to report judgments, arbitration awards, or settlement payments of construction defect claims for rental residential units.” Senator Jerry Hill authored SB465, and his office is presently now drafting legislation on settlement reporting based in part on this study. The most troubling concern about the study is transparency. The report references nine exhibits, all of which have been withheld from publication under purposes of confidentiality. Therefore, much of the CSLB’s study must be taken at face value because much of the data they rely on to formulate their conclusions cannot be independently verified. One of the factors that the CSLB undertook in its study was to determine criteria for when a settlement was “nuisance value,” and therefore less important for reporting purposes. The CSLB acknowledged there was no industry-wide definition for “nuisance value,” whether it be in the insurance industry, construction industry, or otherwise. Insurer survey respondents reached a general consensus on aspects of what can constitute a “nuisance value” settlement, including the amount of the settlement and the size of the case. However, the response rate to the insurer survey was only 3.3 percent. In general, the concern with using settlement amount and size of the case as indicative factors is the fact that a large settlement size, for instance, may still constitute a “nuisance value” settlement. One example would be a large settlement figure in a case involving hundreds of homes in multiple subdivisions. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John Castro, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani LLP
    Mr. Castro may be contacted at

    Coverage Issues: When You Need Your Own Lawyer in a Construction Defect Suit

    October 16, 2013 —
    When an insurer hires an attorney on behalf of a client in a construction defect suit, that attorney is the client’s lawyer, but as Mike Curry writes on the website of Pendleton Wilson Hennessey & Crow, PC, a point may come when you need to hire your own additional attorney. Even though an insurance company client may refer to the lawyer as “the insurance carrier’s attorney,” Mr. Curry cites the words of the Colorado Bar Association’s ethics committee, “the insured is the client to whom the lawyer’s duty of loyalty is owed, regardless of any retention agreement the lawyer may have with the carrier.” Mr. Curry then offers the example of what happens when the insurance company advises its client that it may not cover. “You presumably call your attorney and ask him to explain what’s going on, what the letter means, and what to do next.” All the attorney can say is “I cannot offer legal advice on coverage issues.” This is the limitation of what Mr. Curry refers to as “the tripartite relationship.” The attorney has been retained for issues related to the construction defect dispute between the insured and the plaintiff. Not between the insurer and its insured. The attorney has, as he points out, a fiduciary obligation to the insurance company. When coverage issues arise, “an independent attorney — one you hire — can help you with the coverage issues that your insurance-assigned attorney simply cannot address.” He further notes that “personal counsel owes no fiduciary obligation to the insurance company,” and can be “utilized to persuade the carrier to provide coverage or settle the case.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Toward Increased Citizen Engagement in Urban Planning

    November 14, 2018 —
    Digitalization creates new opportunities for citizen engagement in urban planning. I gave a short presentation on the topic at the Digitalization in Urban Planning event in Helsinki. The event was organized by CHAOS Architects, a tech company. Its AI cloud platform allows citizens to share ideas about their city and co-create it with their community. The platform contains engagement-driven applications and third-party APIs that process business intelligence for better interaction and decision-making. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at

    No Additional Insured Coverage for Subcontractor's Work Outside Policy Period

    August 19, 2015 —
    In a dispute between two insurers, the district court determined that the contractor was not an additional insured under the subcontractor's policy. Navigators Spec. Ins. Co. v. St. Paul Surplus Lines Ins. Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79338 (N. D. Cal. June 17, 2015). McDevitt & McDevitt Construction Corporation was the general contractor for construction of a condominium complex. McDevitt was insured by Navigators Specialty Insurance Company. F&M was a subcontractor for the project for providing structural steel components. F&M's subcontract required it to obtain liability insurance and name McDevitt as an additional insured under a policy that was to be primary. F&M secured a policy with North American Capacity Insurance Company (NAC) which included an endorsement for additional insureds. The endorsement provided that an entity could be an additional insured only with respect to "occurrences resulting from work performed by you during the policy period, or occurrences resulting from the conduct of your business during the policy period." McDevitt and F&M were sued for construct defect claims. Navigators defended McDevitt and NAC defended F&M. Navigators tendered McDevitt's defense to NAC because McDevitt was an additional insured under NAC's policy. NAC disclaimed coverage. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at

    High School Gym Closed by Construction Defects

    October 28, 2011 —

    The high school gym in Lake Oswego, Oregon has been shut down because testing has revealed that the construction defects have lead to deterioration of the structural integrity of the roof. The school district noted that there was a chance of collapse if there were a “significant seismic event or heavy rain and winds and snow.” The school district has been in a lawsuit with the builders since 2008, which was recently settled for $600,000.

    The school board is still determining whether the original contractor will be asked to correct the defect or if they will bid the job out.

    Read the full story...

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

    Condominium Association Wins $5 Million Judgment against Developer

    July 31, 2013 —
    Belgravia Condominium Association, a group of condo owners in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, have secured a $5.05 million judgment against the contractor who converted their 1902 building into condominiums. The suit alleged that the developers and engineers failed to disclose structural problems to the condominium buyers. One issue at hand was the maintenance of the building’s façade which has historic status. Repairs to the façade alone are expected to require $2 million. Ronald Williams, the lawyer for the association, noted that the iron canopy at the entrance had begun to break away and fall even before the condominium association came into being. The decision isn’t yet final, as the developer has an opportunity to appeal. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Engineer TRC Fends Off Lawsuits After Merger

    August 17, 2017 —
    In the wake of its merger with an investment fund, TRC Cos. has been busy swatting away pesky shareholder lawsuits driven by law firms who specialize in such litigation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Scott Van Voorhis, ENR
    ENR may be contacted at

    Construction Law Client Alert: California’s Right to Repair Act (SB 800) Takes Another Hit, Then Fights Back

    February 25, 2014 —
    Last week, the California appellate courts decided two cases with ramifications under the Right to Repair Act. The first case, Burch, addresses whether the Right to Repair Act is the exclusive remedy for the homeowner. The second case, KB Home, addresses a situation where a homeowner or the homeowner's insurer fails to follow the procedures under the Right to Repair Act. Last August, the Fourth Appellate District announced its decision in Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Brookfield Crystal Cove LLC (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 98 holding that SB 800 is not a homeowner’s exclusive remedy in situations where defects cause actual damage. Many lawyers believed that Liberty Mutual would be a one-off because of its facts – it was a subrogation case brought by an insurance company. So much for that. Now the Second Appellate District is getting into the act. In Burch v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles County, et al., the Second Appellate District overturned an order granting summary adjudication in favor of a developer, general contractor, and their respective owners, in a construction defect action brought by a residential homeowner. The trial court found that the Right to Repair Act precluded the homeowner’s negligence and implied warranty claims but the Court of Appeal reversed. Reprinted courtesy of Steven M. Cvitanovic, Haight Brown & Bonesteel, LLP and Whitney L. Stefko, Haight Brown & Bonesteel, LLP Mr. Cvitanovic may be contacted at, Ms. Stefko may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of