• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking building expert Samson Alabama concrete tilt-up building expert Samson Alabama retail construction building expert Samson Alabama landscaping construction building expert Samson Alabama housing building expert Samson Alabama custom homes building expert Samson Alabama parking structure building expert Samson Alabama production housing building expert Samson Alabama custom home building expert Samson Alabama condominium building expert Samson Alabama Medical building building expert Samson Alabama tract home building expert Samson Alabama industrial building building expert Samson Alabama townhome construction building expert Samson Alabama high-rise construction building expert Samson Alabama mid-rise construction building expert Samson Alabama low-income housing building expert Samson Alabama casino resort building expert Samson Alabama condominiums building expert Samson Alabama multi family housing building expert Samson Alabama structural steel construction building expert Samson Alabama institutional building building expert Samson Alabama
    Samson Alabama construction expert witness consultantSamson Alabama building code compliance expert witnessSamson Alabama consulting engineersSamson Alabama slope failure expert witnessSamson Alabama building expertSamson Alabama forensic architectSamson Alabama construction experts
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Expert Builders Information
    Samson, Alabama

    Alabama Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Although there is case law precedent for right to repair, Title 6 Article 13A states action must be commenced within 2 years after cause and not more than 13 years after completion of construction.

    Building Expert Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Samson Alabama

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.

    Building Expert Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Home Builders Association of Dothan & Wiregrass Area
    Local # 0132
    PO Box 9791
    Dothan, AL 36304
    Samson Alabama Building Expert 10/ 10

    Enterprise Home Builders Association
    Local # 0133
    PO Box 310861
    Enterprise, AL 36331
    Samson Alabama Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Metro Mobile Inc
    Local # 0156
    1613 University Blvd S
    Mobile, AL 36609

    Samson Alabama Building Expert 10/ 10

    South Alabama Home Builders Association
    Local # 0102
    PO Box 190
    Greenville, AL 36037
    Samson Alabama Building Expert 10/ 10

    Baldwin County Home Builders Association
    Local # 0184
    916 PLantation Blvd
    Fairhope, AL 36532

    Samson Alabama Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Alabama
    Local # 0100
    PO Box 241305
    Montgomery, AL 36124

    Samson Alabama Building Expert 10/ 10

    Greater Montgomery Home Builders Association
    Local # 0164
    6336 Woodmere Blvd
    Montgomery, AL 36117

    Samson Alabama Building Expert 10/ 10

    Building Expert News and Information
    For Samson Alabama

    Subcontractor Exception to Your Work Exclusion Paves the Way for Coverage

    RCW 82.32.655 Tax Avoidance Statute/Speculative Building

    Finalists in San Diego’s Moving Parklet Design Competition Announced

    10 Safety Tips for General Contractors

    Construction Defects Lead to “A Pretty Shocking Sight”

    OSHA Issues Fines for Fatal Building Collapse in Philadelphia

    Beverly Hills Voters Reject Plan for Enclave's Tallest Building

    Big Builder’s Analysis of the Top Ten Richest Counties

    Colorado Supreme Court Weighs in on Timeliness of Claims Against Subcontractors in Construction Defect Actions

    Subcontractor Entitled to Defense for Defective Work Causing Property Damage Beyond Its Scope of Work

    Contractors Can No Longer Make Roof Repairs Following Their Own Inspections

    New Orleans Reviews System After Storm Swamps Pumps

    Stadium Intended for the 2010 World Cup Still Not Ready

    Wage Theft Investigations and Citations in the Construction Industry

    How Well Do You Know the 2012 IECC Code?

    Spa High-Rise Residents Frustrated by Construction Defects

    Sales of Existing Homes in U.S. Fall to Lowest Since 2012

    Honoring Veterans Under Our Roof & Across the World

    The Future of Construction Defects in Utah Unclear

    Trump Tower Is Now One of NYC’s Least-Desirable Luxury Buildings

    Excess Carrier Successfully Appeals Primary Insurer’s Summary Judgment Award

    Sometimes It’s Okay to Destroy Evidence

    Update Your California Release Provisions to Include Amended Section 1542 Language

    Jobsite Safety, Workforce Shortage Drive Innovation in Machine Automation

    The Simple Reason Millennials Aren't Moving Out Of Their Parents' Homes: They're Crushed By Debt

    NYC Airports Get $500,000 Makeover Contest From Cuomo

    Court Narrowly Interprets “Faulty Workmanship” Provision

    Endorsement Excludes Replacement of Undamaged Property with Matching Materials

    Keeping Up With Fast-moving FAA Drone Regulations

    William Lyon Homes Unites with Polygon Northwest Company

    Indemnity Clauses—What do they mean, and what should you be looking for?

    Insurers' Motion to Knock Out Bad Faith, Negligent Misrepresentation Claims in Construction Defect Case Denied

    CEB’s Mechanics Liens and Related Remedies – 2014 Update

    What to Know Before Building a Guesthouse

    To Bee or Not to Bee - CA Court Finds Denial of Coverage Based on Exclusion was Premature Where Facts had not been Judicially Determined

    No Coverage for Property Damage That is Limited to Work Completed by Subcontractor

    Effects of Amendment to Florida's Statute of Repose on the Products Completed Operations Hazard

    Construction Defect Coverage Barred Under Business Risk Exclusion in Colorado

    VOSH Jumps Into the Employee Misclassification Pool

    Low Interest Rates Encourages Homeowners to become Landlords

    English v. RKK. . . The Rest of the Story

    Four Things Construction Professionals Need to Know About Asbestos

    Insurer's Withheld Discovery Must be Produced in Bad Faith Case

    Court Denies Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Collapse Claim

    Condo Developers Buy in Washington despite Construction Defect Litigation

    Smart Cities Offer New Ideas for Connectivity

    Standard of Care

    Ensuing Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

    Discussion of the Discovery Rule and Tolling Statute of Limitations

    Million-Dollar U.S. Housing Loans Surge to Record Level
    Corporate Profile


    The Samson, Alabama 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 Samson'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
    Samson, Alabama

    No Coverage for Additional Insured After Completion of Operations

    March 26, 2014 —
    The Fifth Circuit held there was no duty to defend an additional insured for alleged negligence after completion of the project. Woodward v. Acceptance Indemn. Ins. Co., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 2569 (5th Cir. Feb. 11, 2014). Pass Marianne, L.L.C. contracted for the construction of condominiums. The general contractor was Woodward. DCM Corporation, L.L.C. was a subcontractor for the concrete work. DCM worked on the project from January to October 2006. The entire project was completed in August 2007. Pass Marianne sold the condominiums to Lemon Drop Properties in October 2007. Lemon Drop sued Pass Marianne and Woodward a year after purchasing the condominium. Pass Marianne filed a cross-claim against Woodward alleging faulty construction and damage arising out of the construction. The claims were arbitrated. A significant issue in the arbitration was the fault of the concrete subcontractor, DCM. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at

    Construction Defect Suit Can Continue Against Plumber

    June 28, 2013 —
    The Kansas Court of Appeals has reversed a district court ruling that a homeowner’s suit against a plumber was barred under the economic loss doctrine. However, subsequently the Kansas Supreme Court “refused to extend the economic loss doctrine to homeowner claims against construction contractors.” In light of this, the appeals court sent the case back to the lower court. The case, Coker v. Siler, was brought by Gregory Coker, who had bought a home from J.M.C. Construction. JMC purchased an unfinished house from Michael D. Siler in August 2006. As part of the completion process, John M. Chaney, the president of JMC, installed the water line into the residence. Mr. Coker bought the home in September 2007. Starting in April 2008, Mr. Coker noticed that his water bills had increased. Mr. Coker could find “no evidence of a leak above the ground,” so he contacted JMC Construction. Mr. Chaney had R.D. Johnson Excavation dig up the water line, after which a gap was discovered that had been allowing water to flow under the foundation. In addition to the higher water bills, an engineer determined that the water “resulted in cracks in the wall and uneven doors.” Mr. Coker sued, Siler, J.M.C. and Chaney for negligence, breach of implied warranty, strict liability, and breach of express warranty. J.M.C. and Chaney requested a summary judgment. The court dismissed Mr. Coker’s claims of negligence, strict liability, and breach of implied warranty on the basis of the economic loss doctrine, rejecting a petition from Mr. Coker to reconsider. The court, however, allowed Mr. Cocker to proceed with his claim of express warranty. In December, 2011, Mr. Coker accepted an offer from J.M.C. of $40,000. Mr. Coker then appealed the summary judgment, making the claim that while the court’s decision was based on Prendiville v. Contemporary Homes, Inc., this has now been overruled by David v. Hett. In this case, “the court ultimately found the rationale supporting the economic loss doctrine failed to justify a departure from a long time of cases in Kansas that establish a homeowner’s right to assert claims against residential contractors.” The appeals court concluded that “although the district court properly relied on the law as it existed at the time of its ruling, the intervening change in the law necessarily renders the conclusion reached by the district court erroneous as a matter of law.” In sending this case back to the district court, the appeals court noted that the lower court will need to determine if the “defendant accused of negligence did not have a duty to act in a certain manner towards the plaintiff,” in which case “summary judgment is proper. Mr. Coker claims that Mr. Chaney did indeed have this duty. Further, Mr. Coker claimed that Mr. Chaney had a duty arising out of implied warranty. The appeals court questioned whether the district court properly applied the economic loss doctrine to this claim, because despite being president of the construction company, Mr. Chaney “in his individual capacity as a plumber performing work for Coker, was not a party to the J.M.C. contract.” The court found that “Coker’s claim that Chaney breached an implied duty within such a contract fails as a matter of law.” However, the court did uphold Cocker’s claim of a contractor liability for injury to a third party, noting that “Chaney owed Coker a legal duty independent of Coker’s contact with J.M.C.” The appeals court left it to the district court to determine if the defect that caused the damage was present when the house left J.M.C.’s possession. The case was reversed and remanded “with directions to reinstate Coker’s claim of negligence against Chaney in his individual capacity as a plumber.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    How California’s Construction Industry has dealt with the New Indemnity Law

    October 22, 2014 —
    It has been almost two years since the California legislature enacted changes to the state’s indemnity law affecting commercial construction contracts. Although we do not yet have any court opinions analyzing the new statutes, the attorneys at Newmeyer & Dillion now have real world experience in negotiating such indemnity provisions. It is time to evaluate how the construction community has reacted to the changes. In this article, we examine the practical applications of the new law to various construction agreements. Enacted on January 1, 2013, the new legislation was the latest in a series of efforts by subcontractors and their insurers to eliminate “Type I” indemnity clauses. Under a Type I provision, a subcontractor has a duty to indemnify the developer or general contractor for the negligence of the developer or general contractor or other subcontractors, in addition to the negligence of the subcontractor itself. In 2006, the law was changed to preclude Type I provisions regarding “For Sale” residential construction defect claims. At that time, there was no such restriction enacted for commercial construction contracts. However, since then, commercial subcontractors have been seeking similar legislation. Their efforts culminated in the 2013 revisions regarding commercial contracts. Commercial Subcontracts Pursuant to the new indemnity statute — Civil Code section 2782.05 — we have revised our clients’ commercial subcontracts to: (a) Eliminate the requirement that the subcontractor indemnify the general contractor for the general contractor’s “active negligence;” and (b) Include the subcontractor’s options for defending claims for which they have an indemnity obligation. Many subcontractors have responded: “Hey, wait a minute, the new legislation eliminated Type I indemnity so you (general contractor) cannot still require any indemnification for the general contractor’s negligence”. Well, that might be the rumor in subcontractor circles, but the new statute does not eliminate indemnity for the general contractor’s passive fault. In addition, the Civil Code lists 13 instances where the new indemnity restrictions do not apply. Residential Subcontracts The legislature did not make anyone’s job easier by drafting a different indemnity provision for commercial subcontracts than for residential subcontracts. In fact, the residential and commercial statutes are different in several critical respects. First, the restrictions on indemnity in the residential statute apply only to construction defect claims in newly constructed “For Sale” houses. The statute does not preclude Type I indemnity provisions for any other claims arising out of residential subcontracts. In contrast, the indemnity restrictions in the commercial statute apply to all claims arising out of commercial subcontracts. In addition, the commercial statute allows indemnity for the general contractor’s passive fault. Since some subcontractors on “residential” projects perform off-site “commercial” work as well, we have amended even residential subcontracts to address the subcontractors’ various indemnity obligations for different parts of their work (e.g., residential work versus commercial work). Owner-Contractor Agreements The January 1, 2013 new indemnity provisions apply not only to subcontracts, but also to owner-contractor agreements. Civil Code section 2782(c)(1) precludes indemnity for an owner’s active negligence. Interestingly, the exclusions contained in Civil Code section 2782.05 for subcontracts do not apply, and the statute does not provide contractors with the option of defending claims set forth in the sections concerning subcontracts. Therefore, we have revised the indemnity provisions in owner-contractor agreements to exclude indemnity for the owner’s active negligence. Design Professional Agreements The 2007 revisions with respect to “For Sale” residential contracts (discussed above), and the 2013 revisions for commercial contracts do not apply to design professionals. The new indemnity statute concerning commercial subcontracts specifically excludes design professionals from the “anti-indemnity” benefits provided to subcontractors. Therefore, Type I indemnity provisions are fair game and can still be included in design professional contracts. Conclusion In sum, Civil Code sections 2782 et seq. now contain an increasingly complex framework for indemnity rules in construction contracts. For example, there is one set of rules for “For Sale” residential construction defect claims (no indemnity for the developer’s active or passive negligence), another for any other claims arising out of residential construction (Type I indemnity is permitted), another for commercial subcontracts (no indemnity for the general contractor’s active negligence, but indemnity for the general contractor’s passive negligence unless any of the exceptions apply, in which case Type I indemnity is permitted), and yet another for commercial owner contractor agreements (no indemnity for the owner’s active negligence, but indemnity for the owner’s passive negligence with no exceptions). California’s indemnity laws are complex, and rumors as to the impact of the new legislation have made it even more difficult to negotiate these provisions. It is imperative that indemnity clauses in construction contracts clearly delineate the obligations for the specific type or types of work contemplated by the contract. The legislature’s attempt to simplify indemnity obligations has actually made such provisions lengthier and more cumbersome. As experienced construction attorneys, our task is to draft indemnity provisions that comply with the laws, address potential claims, and are understandable. Mr. Himmelstein is a partner in the Newport Beach office of Newmeyer & Dillion and practices in the areas of construction, real estate, business and insurance litigation. He also specializes in drafting and negotiating construction and real estate contracts. Mark can be reached at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Alert: AAA Construction Industry Rules Update

    August 26, 2015 —
    The American Arbitration Association has made some needed updates to their Construction Industry Arbitration and Mediation Rules, effective July 1, 2015. Among the changes listed at their website are:
    • A mediation step for all cases with claims of $100,000 or more (subject to the ability of any party to opt out).
    • Consolidation and joinder time frames and filing requirements to streamline these increasingly involved issues in construction arbitrations.
    • New preliminary hearing rules to provide more structure and organization to get the arbitration process on the right track from the beginning.
    • Information exchange measures to give arbitrators a greater degree of control to limit the exchange of information, including electronic documents.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, Law Office of Christopher G. Hill, PC
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at

    Updated: Happenings in and around the West Coast Casualty Seminar

    May 13, 2014 —
    For those who are attending the West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar this week, the Construction Defect Journal has updated its list of concerts, sporting events, and museum exhibitions taking place in and around Anaheim. Whether you like to spend your personal time checking out a new band, or watching your favorite Angel slide into home, or perusing the local art museum, there is something to spark your interest. ***CONCERT VENUES*** THE HOUSE OF BLUES IN ANAHEIM Live Band Karaoke Wednesday, May 14th, 2014 Doors Open at 10pm / Show Begins at 11pm Every Wednesday experience the excitement of singing your favorite song with a live band. Over 200 songs to choose from our massive collection of classics and current hits. Get down here and let your vocals roar. No Cover! Rockin’ The Blues Thursday, May 15th, 2014 Doors Open at 10pm / Show Begins at 11pm Every Thursday night head down to The Voodoo Lounge and listen to the best local live blues band. This is the music that shaped American music and influences every genre we listen to today. No cover! Alice in Cooperland with Sons of Cream and Iron Plaid Friday, May 16th, 2014 Doors Open at 7pm / Show Begins at 8pm Friday Night Live Friday, May 16th, 2014 Doors Open at 10pm / Show Begins at 11pm Every Friday night features live music in The Voodoo Lounge. One stage, weekly mind blowing performances. No cover! Stephen "Ragga" Marley Saturday, May 17th, 2014 Doors Open at 8pm / Show Begins at 9pm Dance, Pop and Hip-Hop Saturday, May 17th, 2014 Doors Open at 10pm / Show Begins at 11pm Every Saturday night The Voodoo Lounge heats up with the sounds of DJ Matt Hill spinning across genres and getting the party started. No Cover! For More Information on Events at THE HOUSE OF BLUES OF ANAHEIM... THE GROVE OF ANAHEIM Lindsey Stirling plus special guest Dia Frampton Wednesday, May 14, 2014 Doors Open at 7pm / Show Begins at 8pm Primal Fear Thursday, May 15, 2014 Doors Open at 6:30pm / Show Begins at 7pm Jillian Michaels 'Maximize Your Life' Tour Friday, May 16, 2014 Doors Open at 6pm / Show begins at 8pm For More Information on Events at THE GROVE OF ANAHEIM... THE HONDA CENTER 2014 Powerhouse Saturday, May 17, 2014 – Parking lot Festival 3pm – Show Begins 7pm Power 106 presents Powerhouse with Performances by Nicki Minaj, TDE’s Schoolboy Q, Wiz Khalifa, Trey Songz, YG, Jennifer Lopez, Childish Gambino, Juicy J, Sage The Gemini, Isaiah Rashad, plus Special Surprise Guests and More! For More Information and to Purchase Tickets for THE HONDA CENTER... ***SPORTING EVENTS*** ANGEL’S STADIUM - BASEBALL The Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim v. Tampa Bay Rays Thursday, May 15th at 7:05pm Friday, May 16th at 7:05pm Saturday, May 17th at 6:05pm Sunday, May 18th at 12:35pm For More Information and to Purchase Tickets for ANGEL'S BASEBALL... THE HONDA CENTER – HOCKEY Ducks v. Kings – Game 7 (If Necessary) Friday, May 16th at TBA For More Information and to Purchase Tickets for DUCKS' HOCKEY... ***MUSEUM EXHIBITIONS*** MUZEO Transcending Trash: The Art of Upcycling Apr 26 –Aug 31, 2014 Transcending Trash: The Art of Upcycling celebrates the transformation of throwaway objects into complex and colorful works of art. African Exhibit On The Move (free) May 7 –May 1, 2014 Photographer Dawn Harman has captured the spirit and energy of Africa through a series of limited edition images- each and every photo tells an extraordinary story. Museum Days/Hours: Tuesday – Sunday (Closed Mondays) / 10 am to 5 pm For More Information on Events at MUZEO... BOWERS MUSEUM (Santa Ana) Beethoven: The Late Great Feb 8 - May 18, 2014 In recognition of the 60th anniversary of the Philharmonic Society of Orange County and its 21st and final season of Dean Corey’s leadership, the Philharmonic Society will present a multi-season celebration of the major late works of Ludwig van Beethoven, including a celebratory exhibition at the Bowers Museum. Soulful Creatures: Animal Mummies In Ancient Egypt Mar 22 – June 15, 2014 Soulful Creatures: Animal Mummies in Ancient Egypt is the first major exhibition to focus on one of the most fascinating aspects of ancient Egyptian culture and religion—the mummification of animals. Chuck Jones: Doodles of a Genius Apr 26 - August 3, 2014 This exhibition contains original drawings, most never publicly displayed, including a section of 50 so‐called "Doodles," perhaps best described as coming from one artist's very far side. The Lure Of Chinatown: Painting California's Chinese Communities Apr 12 - August 31, 2014 The unique cultural customs, fascinating architecture, and rich aesthetic of the Chinese communities in San Francisco and Los Angeles inspired many 19th and 20th century artists. Museum Days/Hours: Tuesday – Sunday (Closed Mondays) / 10 am to 4 pm For More Information on Events at BOWERS MUSEUM... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Property Insurance Exclusion for Constant or Repeated Leakage of Water

    March 14, 2018 —
    A property insurance policy, no different than any insurance policy, contains exclusions for events that are NOT covered under the terms of the policy. One such common exclusion in a property insurance policy is an exclusion for damages caused by "constant or repeated seepage or leakage of water…over a period of 14 or more days." The application of this exclusion was discussed in the recent opinion of Hicks v. American Integrity Ins. Co. of Florida, 43 Fla. L. Weekly D446a (Fla. 5th DCA 2018). In this case, while the insured was out of town, the water line to his refrigerator started to leak. When the insured return home over a month later, the supply line was discharging almost a thousand gallons of water per day. The insured submitted a property insurance claim. The property insurer engaged a consultant that opined (likely, correctly) that the water line had been leaking for at least five weeks. Based on the above-mentioned exclusion, i.e., that water had been constantly leaking for over a period of 14 days, the insurer denied coverage. This denial led to the inevitable coverage dispute. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at

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

    September 04, 2019 —
    Senator Bill Dodd, who represents Napa County and surrounding areas in the California Senate, has recently introduced Senate Bill 240, known colloquially as The Insurance Adjuster Act of 2019. S.B. 240 would amend the California Insurance Code to streamline and organize claim processing, particularly during a state of emergency / catastrophic events. The proposal is in response to a series of devastating wildfires which ravaged the Sonoma County and Napa Valley wine country during the 2017 fire season (Atlas, Tubbs, and Nun fires). Many of Senator Dodd’s constituents reported difficulty in navigating the claim process due to multiple claim professionals handling a single claim, many of whom were outside of California, and many of whose capabilities were challenged. S.B. 240 would direct the Department of Insurance to issue annual notices setting forth legal developments as they relate to property insurance policies, including best practices for evaluating damage caused by an emergency, and requires out-of-state claims professionals to certify, under penalty of perjury, that they have read these notices along with claim adjusting literature also prepared by the Department of Insurance. S.B. 240 would also require insurers to designate a primary point of contact for their customers during a state of emergency until the claim is closed or litigation is initiated. While the proposed legislation would not prohibit multiple claims professionals handling a single claim, it would provide for training standards issued by the Department of Insurance on how best to handle claims in a state of emergency. Further, S.B. 240 would require claims professionals who are not licensed in California (1) to be supervised by a licensed California claims professional, and (2) to read and understand the annual emergency claim adjusting literature issued by the Department of Insurance within 15 calendar days of beginning adjusting of claims in California. The bill passed the Senate by unanimous vote and is pending in the Assembly. The bill is also supported by Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara. Accordingly, the bill is expected to pass the Legislature. Once enacted, S.B. 240 would significantly elevate claim adjusting requirements related to emergencies, such as natural disasters, by placing greater oversight in the Department of Insurance, and greater responsibility on claims professional within and outside of California. How pragmatic these requirements are and what practical impact they will have on the industry are developments which we will follow and provide further commentary as this bill makes its way through the California legislature and into the California Insurance Code. Reprinted courtesy of Jon A.Turigliatto, Chapman Glucksman Dean Roeb & Barger and Ravi R. Mehta, Chapman Glucksman Dean Roeb & Barger Mr. A.Turigliatto may be contacted at Mr. Mehta may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Couple Perseveres to Build Green

    August 27, 2013 —
    Most homeowners don’t want to make their way through the mountain of paperwork required for LEED certification. But according to the Patriot News, Jens and Donna Damgaard aren’t most homeowners. The Damgaards set out to build a LEED-certified home, and struck with it to the end. The Damgaards started out by assembling a team so there wouldn’t be any questions down the road. They also kept going green as a goal, no matter what. Don Park, their contractor, said that “it worked out well. There was never a cost issue.” Jens Damgaas is an attorney in Harrisburg, and he put his skills as a lawyer to work in going through the paperwork, as if he were the projet’s LEED consultant. One further takeaway from the contractor, “everyone wants two-button toilets.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of