BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing building expert Slocomb Alabama condominium building expert Slocomb Alabama tract home building expert Slocomb Alabama high-rise construction building expert Slocomb Alabama custom homes building expert Slocomb Alabama housing building expert Slocomb Alabama casino resort building expert Slocomb Alabama industrial building building expert Slocomb Alabama retail construction building expert Slocomb Alabama multi family housing building expert Slocomb Alabama concrete tilt-up building expert Slocomb Alabama townhome construction building expert Slocomb Alabama parking structure building expert Slocomb Alabama institutional building building expert Slocomb Alabama custom home building expert Slocomb Alabama Subterranean parking building expert Slocomb Alabama structural steel construction building expert Slocomb Alabama office building building expert Slocomb Alabama condominiums building expert Slocomb Alabama mid-rise construction building expert Slocomb Alabama low-income housing building expert Slocomb Alabama hospital construction building expert Slocomb Alabama
    Slocomb Alabama construction defect expert witnessSlocomb Alabama expert witness roofingSlocomb Alabama expert witness concrete failureSlocomb Alabama architecture expert witnessSlocomb Alabama construction cost estimating expert witnessSlocomb Alabama structural concrete expertSlocomb Alabama construction forensic expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Expert Builders Information
    Slocomb, 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 Slocomb 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
    Slocomb Alabama Building Expert 10/ 10

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

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

    Slocomb Alabama Building Expert 10/ 10

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

    Slocomb Alabama Building Expert 10/ 10

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

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

    Slocomb Alabama Building Expert 10/ 10

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

    Slocomb Alabama Building Expert 10/ 10


    Building Expert News and Information
    For Slocomb Alabama


    Safety, Technology Combine to Change the Construction Conversation

    ADA Lawsuits Spur Renovation Work in Fresno Area

    Ninth Circuit Clears the Way for Review of Oregon District Court’s Rulings in Controversial Climate Change Case

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

    Nevada Bill Aims to Reduce Legal Fees For Construction Defect Practitioners

    City Council Authorizes Settlement of Basement Flooding Cases

    Illinois Supreme Court Limits Reach of Implied Warranty Claims Against Contractors

    Housing Starts in U.S. Drop to Lowest Level in Three Months

    No One to Go After for Construction Defects at Animal Shelter

    24th Annual West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar A Success

    Manhattan Bargain: Condos for Less Than $3 Million

    Shaken? Stirred? A Primer on License Bond Claims in California

    CDJ’s #7 Topic of the Year: The Las Vegas Harmon Hotel Year-Long Demolition & Trial Begins

    New Jersey Senate Advances Bad Faith Legislation

    Florida Court of Appeals Rejects Insurer’s Attempt to Intervene in Underlying Lawsuit to Submit Special Interrogatories

    Preliminary Notices: Common Avoidable But Fatal Mistakes

    Duty to Defend Negligent Misrepresentation Claim

    Luxury Home Sales are on the Rise

    Suit Limitation Provision Upheld

    South Carolina “occurrence” and allocation

    Real-Estate Pros Fight NYC Tax on Wealthy Absentee Owners

    Trio of White and Williams Attorneys Named Top Lawyers by Delaware Today

    Another Reminder that Your Construction Contract Language Matters

    Parol Evidence can be Used to Defeat Fraudulent Lien

    Court of Appeal Opens Pandora’s Box on Definition of “Contractor” for Forum Selection Clauses

    Visual Construction Diaries – Interview with Jeff Sassinsky of Fovea Aero

    California Complex Civil Litigation Superior Court Panels

    Federal Court Again Confirms No Coverage For Construction Defects in Hawaii

    The General Assembly Adds Some Clarity to Contracts and Unlicensed Contractors

    North Dakota Universities Crumble as Oil Cash Pours In

    ConsensusDOCS Updates its Forms

    Wood Smith Henning & Berman LLP Expands into Georgia

    Contractors: Revisit your Force Majeure Provisions to Account for Hurricanes

    Colorado Construction-Defects Reform Law Attempt Expected in 2015

    Anatomy of an Indemnity Provision

    Taylor Morrison Home Corp’ New San Jose Development

    FAA Seeks Largest Fine Yet on Drones in Near-Miss Crackdown

    Wendel Rosen Construction Attorneys Recognized by Super Lawyers

    Texas covered versus uncovered allocation and “legally obligated to pay.”

    Tall Mass Timber Buildings Now Possible Under 2021 IBC Code Changes

    When it Comes to Trials, it’s Like a Box of Chocolates. Sometimes You Get the Icky Cream Filled One

    Assert a Party’s Noncompliance of Conditions Precedent with Particularity

    Federal Court Rejects Insurer's Argument that Wisconsin Has Adopted the Manifestation Trigger for Property Policy

    Construction Lien Needs to Be Recorded Within 90 Days from Lienor’s Final Furnishing

    California Contractors – You Should Know That Section 7141.5 May Be Your Golden Ticket

    Rescission of Policy for Misrepresentation in Application Reversed

    Acceptable Worksite: New City of Seattle Specification Provisions Now In Effect

    Congratulations 2019 DE, MA, NJ, NY and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Insurer Must Defend Insured Against Construction Defect Claims

    Homeowner Sues Brick Manufacturer for Spalling Bricks
    Corporate Profile

    SLOCOMB ALABAMA BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Slocomb, 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. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Slocomb'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
    Slocomb, Alabama

    Hong Kong Buyers Queue for New Homes After Prices Plunge

    July 09, 2014 —
    On a Saturday morning in mid-June, thousands wait, crammed into Hong Kong’s Fortune Metropolis mall, across Victoria Harbor from the main business district, their eyes locked on large elevated screens. Cheers erupt when numbers flash, indicating the lucky ticket holders in the crowd. They have paid HK$150,000 ($19,354) to enter a lottery that prioritizes buyers of apartments at City Point, a seven-tower development that billionaire Li Ka-shing’s Cheung Kong Holdings Ltd. (1) is building. More than 5,000 homebuyer-hopefuls are vying for 442 units, or about 11 for every home that went on sale the weekend of June 14. Housing sales in Hong Kong are rising after government efforts to cool soaring prices led transactions to plunge last year to the lowest since at least 2002. A drop in mortgage rates and discounts from builders are luring back buyers of new homes after their price fell as much as 20 percent since October. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michelle Yun, Bloomberg
    Ms. Yun may be contacted at myun11@bloomberg.net

    Insurer Awarded Summary Judgment on Collapse Claim

    January 06, 2020 —
    The Eleventh Circuit agreed with the insurer that there was no coverage for a collapse under the policy. S.O. Beach Corp. v. Great Am. Ins. Co.,2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 32569 (11th Cir. Oct. 31, 2019). S.O. Beach Corporation and Larios on the Beach, Inc ("Larios") owned a building in Miami Beach. Sometime between march 4, 2012 and April 10, 2013, Larios discovered that parts of the first three floors of its building had caved in to varying degrees. The primary cause of the collapse was a wooden support beam that had severely rotted. Larios found a broken pipe that was gushing water onto the beam, causing deterioration. Larios was forced to evacuate the building until the damage was repaired. Larios submitted a claim under its all-risk policy with Great American. The policy required that a collapse an "abrupt falling down or caving in of a building or any part of a building" to be covered. Before a coverage decision was made, Larios sued for breach of contract. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. The district court granted Great American's motion and denied Larios' motion. 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

    Washington Supreme Court Sides with Lien Claimants in Williams v. Athletic Field

    September 30, 2011 —

    The Washington Supreme Court issued their opinion today on Williams v. Athletic Field, perhaps the most talked about construction law case in the past few years. I have discussed this case exhaustively here on Builders Counsel. Today we have a resolution.

    In an unanimous opinion issued today, the high court sided with lien filers who followed a sample form provided in RCW 60.04.091. Additionally, the court found that a lien company - and presumably other persons - could sign the lien for the lien claimant, as an agent, without invalidating the lien.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Douglas Reiser of Reiser Legal LLC. Mr. Reiser can be contacted at info@reiserlegal.com

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

    California Supreme Court Hands Victory to Private Property Owners Over Public Use

    June 21, 2017 —
    In 1970 the California Supreme Court held that, under certain circumstances, private property owners impliedly dedicate their property to the public if they permit the public to use it. Gion v. City of Santa Cruz (1970) 2 Cal.3d 29. This holding was controversial, and the next year the California Legislature enacted Civil Code section 1009 limiting the public’s ability to permanently use private property through an implied dedication. In the 40-plus years since then, the lower courts have wrestled with the issue of whether the statute limiting implied dedication applies only to recreational uses by the public, or also to nonrecreational uses. On June 15, 2017, the California Supreme Court issued its unanimous opinion in Scher v. Burke (June 15, 2017, S230104) ___ Cal.4th ___, holding that the limitations on implied dedication apply to nonrecreational as well as recreational uses. The case is significant because it demonstrates that the Supreme Court will apply the plain language of the state’s statutes to uphold private property rights. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sean M. Sherlock, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Sherlock may be contacted at ssherlock@swlaw.com

    Ahlers Cressman & Sleight Nationally Ranked as a 2020 “Best Law Firm” by U.S. News – Best Lawyers®

    December 22, 2019 —
    Ahlers Cressman & Sleight is pleased to be recognized by U.S. News – Best Lawyers ® as one of the top construction firms in the United States. The firm received metropolitan Tier 1 rankings in both Construction Law and Construction Litigation. In the national rankings, ACS one of just five Washington firms that was ranked for Construction Law (Tier 3) and one of six that received national rankings for Litigation – Construction (Tier 2). Only one other firm in Washington received a Tier 2 national ranking in Construction Litigation. The U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” rankings are based on a rigorous evaluation process that includes the collection of client and lawyer evaluations, peer review from leading attorneys in the field, and review of additional information provided by law firms as part of the formal submission process. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC

    Unlicensed Contractor Shoots for the Stars . . . Sputters on Takeoff

    September 20, 2017 —
    Elon Musk . . . Eccentric engineer. Technology billionaire. And, now, litigation bad ass. Frequent readers of the California Construction Law Blog know that we’ve talked about the importance of being properly licensed when doing construction work and the risks to you if you don’t. One California contractor recently found this out the hard way. In Phoenix Mechanical Pipeline, Inc. v. Space Exploration Technologies Corp., California Court of Appeals for the Second District, Case No. B269186 (June 13, 2017), contractor Phoenix Mechanical Pipeline, Inc. (Phoenix) lost its boosters . . . err britches . . when it sued Elon Musk’s Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (Space X) due to its failure to have a California contractor’s license. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    Terms of Your Teaming Agreement Matter

    July 30, 2019 —
    These days in construction, and other pursuits, teaming agreements have become a great method for large and small contractors to work together to take advantage of various contract and job requirements from minority participation to veteran ownership. With the proliferation of these agreements, parties must be careful in how they draft the terms of these agreements. Without proper drafting, the parties risk unenforceability of the teaming agreement in the evewnt of a dispute. One potential pitfall in drafting is an “agreement to agree” or an agreement to negotiate a separate contract in the future. This type of pitfall was illustrated in the case of InDyne Inc. v. Beacon Occupational Health & Safety Services Inc. out of the Eastern District of Virginia. In this case, InDyne and Beacon entered into a teaming agreement that provided that InDyne as Prime would seek to use Beacon, the Sub, in the event that InDyne was awarded a contract using Beacon’s numbers. The teaming agreement further provided:
    The agreement shall remain in effect until the first of the following shall occur: … (g) inability of the Prime and the Sub, after negotiating in good faith, to reach agreement on the terms of a subcontract offered by the Prime, in accordance with this agreement.
    InDyne was subsequently awarded a contract with the Air Force and shortly thereafter sent a subcontract to Beacon and requested Beacon’s “best and final” pricing. Beacon protested by letter stating that it was only required to act consistently with its original bid pricing. Beacon then returned the subcontract with the original bid pricing and accepting all but a termination for convenience provision. Shortly thereafter, InDyne informed Beacon that InDyne had awarded the subcontract to one of Beacon’s competitors. Beacon of course sued and argued that the teaming agreement required that InDyne award the subcontract to Beacon. 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

    Ohio Does Not Permit Retroactive Application of Statute of Repose

    October 08, 2014 —
    Don Gregory of Kegler Brown Hill + Ritter (published in Association of Corporate Counsel) reported that while Ohio currently has a statute of repose, the Supreme Court of Ohio recently ruled in a case where the development was built in 1990 but the defects weren’t discovered until 2003 that the statute of repose did not apply since “Ohio had no enforceable statute of repose in 2003 (it had been declared unconstitutional).” Gregory stated that “[t]his case means that some construction defect claims, by condo associations or others, may survive even though construction was completed more than a decade ago.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of