BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Teller Alaska condominium building expert Teller Alaska mid-rise construction building expert Teller Alaska multi family housing building expert Teller Alaska retail construction building expert Teller Alaska custom homes building expert Teller Alaska casino resort building expert Teller Alaska condominiums building expert Teller Alaska Subterranean parking building expert Teller Alaska low-income housing building expert Teller Alaska structural steel construction building expert Teller Alaska production housing building expert Teller Alaska tract home building expert Teller Alaska office building building expert Teller Alaska high-rise construction building expert Teller Alaska landscaping construction building expert Teller Alaska custom home building expert Teller Alaska townhome construction building expert Teller Alaska hospital construction building expert Teller Alaska institutional building building expert Teller Alaska parking structure building expert Teller Alaska industrial building building expert Teller Alaska
    Teller Alaska construction defect expert witnessTeller Alaska expert witness structural engineerTeller Alaska building expertTeller Alaska contractor expert witnessTeller Alaska structural concrete expertTeller Alaska construction code expert witnessTeller Alaska stucco expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Expert Builders Information
    Teller, 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 Teller Alaska

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required


    Building Expert Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Interior Alaska Builders Association
    Local # 0235
    938 Aspen Street
    Fairbanks, AK 99709

    Teller Alaska Building Expert 10/ 10

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

    Teller Alaska Building Expert 10/ 10

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

    Teller Alaska Building Expert 10/ 10

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

    Teller Alaska Building Expert 10/ 10

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

    Teller Alaska Building Expert 10/ 10

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

    Teller Alaska Building Expert 10/ 10

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

    Teller Alaska Building Expert 10/ 10


    Building Expert News and Information
    For Teller Alaska


    Construction Slow to Begin in Superstorm Sandy Cases

    A Construction Stitch in Time

    Making Construction Innovation Stick

    Newmeyer Dillion Attorneys Selected To The Best Lawyers In America© And Orange County "Lawyer Of The Year" 2020

    ZLien Startup has Discovered a Billion in Payments for Clients

    No Choice between Homeowner Protection and Bankrupt Developers?

    Supreme Court of Idaho Rules That Substantial Compliance With the Notice and Opportunity to Repair Act Suffices to Bring Suit

    Emergency Paid Sick Leave and FMLA Leave Updates in Response to COVID-19

    Insurers Get “Floored” by Court of Appeals Regarding the Presumptive Measure of Damages in Consent Judgments

    What If Your CCP 998 Offer is Silent on Costs?

    The Prompt Payment Rollercoaster

    Ex-Detroit Demolition Official Sentenced for Taking Bribes

    The U.S. Flooded One of Houston’s Richest Neighborhoods to Save Everyone Else

    Fatal Crane Collapse in Seattle Prompts Questions About Disassembly Procedures

    American Council of Engineering Companies of California Selects New Director

    'There Was No Fighting This Fire,' California Survivor Says

    Decaying U.S. Roads Attract Funds From KKR to DoubleLine

    Finding of No Coverage Overturned Due to Lack of Actual Policy

    Scaffolding Purchase Suggests No New Building for Board of Equalization

    California’s Prompt Payment Laws: Just Because an Owner Has Changed Course Doesn’t Mean It’s Changed Course on Previous Payments

    Lenders and Post-Foreclosure Purchasers Have Standing to Make Construction Defect Claims for After-Discovered Conditions

    Harmon Tower Construction Defects Update: Who’s To Blame?

    California Court Confirms Broad Coverage Under “Ongoing Operations” Endorsements

    Colorado “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and exclusions j(5) and j(6) “that particular part”

    Federal Court of Appeals Signals an End to Project Labor Agreement Requirements Linked to Development Tax Credits

    As the Term Winds Down, Several Important Regulatory Cases Await the U.S. Supreme Court

    Eleventh Circuit Holds that EPA Superfund Remedial Actions are Usually Entitled to the FTCA “Discretionary Function” Exemption

    Baltimore Project Pushes To Meet Federal Deadline

    Tishman Construction Admits Cheating Trade Center Clients

    Dealing with Abandoned Property After Foreclosure

    COVID-19 Impacts on Subcontractor Default Insurance and Ripple Effects

    Bridges Crumble as Muni Rates at Least Since ’60s Ignored

    Palo Alto Considers Fines for Stalled Construction Projects

    Affirmed: Insureds Bear the Burden of Allocating Covered Versus Uncovered Losses

    Tesla Powerwalls for Home Energy Storage Hit U.S. Market

    Duty to Defend Sorted Between Two Insurers Based Upon Lease and Policies

    Another Guilty Plea in Las Vegas HOA Scandal

    Were Quake Standards Illegally Altered for PG&E Nuclear Power Plant?

    Single-Family Home Gain Brightens U.S. Housing Outlook: Economy

    Recovery Crews Swing Into Action as Hurricane Michael Departs

    Construction Spending Highest Since April 2009

    No Conflict in Successive Representation of a Closely-Held Company and Its Insiders Where Insiders Already Possess Company’s Confidential Information

    New Jersey Court Adopts Continuous Trigger for Construction Defect Claims

    Court Calls Lease-Leaseback Project What it is: A Design-Bid-Build Project

    New Jersey School Blames Leaks on Construction Defects, May Sue

    Colorado Passes Compromise Bill on Construction Defects

    Arbitration: For Whom the Statute of Limitations Does Not Toll in Pennsylvania

    DIR Reminds Public Works Contractors to Renew Registrations Before January 1, 2016 to Avoid Hefty Penalty

    CA Supreme Court Expands Scope of Lawyers’ Statute of Limitations to Non-Legal Malpractice Claims – Confusion Predicted for Law and Motion Judges

    Arizona Contractor Designs Water-Repellant Cabinets
    Corporate Profile

    TELLER ALASKA BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 5500 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Teller, Alaska Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Teller'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
    Teller, Alaska

    The Unpost, Post: Dynamex and the Construction Indianapolis

    July 10, 2018 —
    It’s been three months since the California Supreme Court issued its landmark decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, Case No. S222732 (April 30, 2018) and I’ve had a couple of readers (perhaps my only two) ask whether I was going to write about the decision. I’m not. Well, obviously, that’s not quite true if you’re reading this. Rather, I’ll tell you why I’m writing about not writing about the decision. Dynamex is certainly an important decision and one that will likely be cited for decades to come. In short, Dynamex changed the nearly 30-year old test, first elucidated in S.G. Borello & Sons Inc. v. Department of Industrial Relations (1989) 48 Cal.3d 341, for determining whether a worker is properly classified as an independent contractor or an employee. 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

    How Will Today’s Pandemic Impact Tomorrow’s Construction Contracts?

    October 26, 2020 —
    The emergence of COVID-19 has created a new set of challenges in the already complex world of negotiating construction contracts. In the pre-COVID-19 era, general contractors, construction managers and those negotiating on their behalf, needed to balance a variety of fairly well-established legal risks and exposures and commercial realities with the need to maintain a positive relationship with their counterparty. While many are rightfully concerned with addressing the impacts of COVID-19 to their on-going projects, those negotiating new contracts now are undoubtedly cognizant that they are negotiating in the midst of an unpredictable future that is tipping the historical negotiating balance. The following presents some crucial areas to focus on when negotiating and drafting your contracts in this new era. Contract Terms Through the COVID-19 Lens Contractors should examine proposed new contracts carefully to identify rights that afford COVID-19 protections and identify contractual obligations that create COVID-19 commercial risks. Specific attention should be paid to those sections relating to force majeure/excusable delay, emergencies, changes (including changes in law), contingency, suspension and termination, site investigation as well as all representations and warranties. The paramount concern in examining these provisions is to ensure that they not only entitle the contractor to relief for those unknown events, emergencies and changes, but that they also contain sufficient entitlement for the contractor to obtain both time extensions and financial compensation for unknown impacts of a known event – the COVID-19 pandemic. Reprinted courtesy of Levi W. Barrett, Peckar & Abramson, P.C., Nathan A. Cohen, Peckar & Abramson, P.C.and Mark A. Snyder, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Barrett may be contacted at lbarrett@pecklaw.com Mr. Cohen may be contacted at ncohen@pecklaw.com Mr. Snyder may be contacted at msnyder@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Does the Implied Warranty of Habitability Extend to Subsequent Purchasers? Depends on the State

    October 08, 2014 —
    Attorneys for Traub Liberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP (in JD Supra Business Advisor), discussed how state courts have come to different conclusions as to “whether a subsequent purchaser of a previously inhabited residence can recover contract damages from a builder or general contractor for breach of the implied warranty of habitability.” Recently, a Pennsylvania “sided with the builder, holding that the implied warranty of habitability was grounded in contract law. Thus, the Court reasoned that an action for breach of the implied warranty of habitability required a showing of contractual privity between the parties. Because there was no contractual privity between the Conways and the builder, the Conways could not pursue an action against the builder based on a breach of the implied warranty of habitability.” However, other state courts have made other conclusions. “Iowa permits an action for breach of the implied warranty of workmanlike construction by subsequent purchasers and does not require a showing of contractual privity. Rhode Island also does not require contractual privity, but limits liability to latent defects discovered within 10 years of construction.” Vermont and Connecticut, however, require contract privity. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Virginia Chinese Drywall and pollution exclusion

    May 27, 2011 —

    In Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. The Overlook, LLC, No. 4:10cv69 (E.D. Va. May 13, 2011), homeowner Edmonds sued insured developer/general contractor Overlook seeking damages resulting from defective Chinese drywall installed in Edmonds’ home. Overlook’s CGL insurer Nationwide defended Overlook under a reservation of rights and filed a declaratory judgment action. The federal district trial court granted Nationwide’s motion for summary judgment.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com

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

    Compliance with Building Code Included in Property Damage

    February 07, 2018 —

    A Circuit Court in Florida issued a final judgment determining that the insured's obligation to comply with building code provisions was included in the property damage experienced. Pin-Pon Corp. v. Landmark, Am. Ins. Co., No. 312009CA012244 (Fla. Cir. Ct. Dec. 28, 2017). The decision is here.

    At trial, the plaintiff's architect testified that the total pricing for the code upgrades was $6.2 million. On appeal, the appellate court ruled that plaintiff's Exhibit 98, an Upgrade Insurance Claim, was improperly admitted as a business record. The appellate court stated that the jury may have considered Exhibit 98 in determining the amount of code upgrade damages. Therefore, the verdict was reversed and remanded for a trial on the code upgrade damages only.

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawarii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Mass. Gas Leak Follows NTSB Final Report, Call for Reforms

    November 24, 2019 —
    A major natural-gas leak forced Lawrence, Mass., residents to evacuate their homes early on Sept. 27. National Grid cut power to more than 1,300 customers to avoid another disaster like last year’s natural-gas explosions and fires in Lawrence and two other towns north of Boston. The leak came just days after federal officials called for changes to national pipeline regulations as they released a final report on the causes of the Sept. 13, 2018, disaster. Reprinted courtesy of Johanna Knapschaefer, 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

    California Court Invokes Equity to Stretch Anti-Subrogation Rule Principles

    June 18, 2019 —
    In Western Heritage Ins. Co. v. Frances Todd, Inc. 2019 Cal. App. Lexis 299, the Court of Appeals of California, First Appellate District, addressed whether a commercial condominium association’s carrier could subrogate against the tenants (aka lessees) of one of its member unit owners. After examining the condominium association’s declarations, as well as the lease terms between the owner and the lessees, the court held that the association’s carrier could not subrogate against the lessees because they were implied co-insureds on the policy. To reach its decision, the court explained that an insurer steps into the shoes of its insured, not the party with whom it is in privity. Although the first-party property portion of the association’s insurance policy did not, as required by the association’s declarations, have the owner listed as an additional named insured, the court held that it would be inequitable to treat the association as the sole insured for purposes of determining Western Heritage’s right to bring a subrogation action. In Western Heritage, William R. de Carion d/b/a Surfwood Properties (de Carion or Lessor), owned a commercial unit within a multi-unit commercial building. The building was managed by the East Shore Commercial Condominiums Owners’ Association (the Association). As a unit owner, de Carion was a member of the Association. The Association’s Declarations of Codes, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&Rs) required the Association to procure fire insurance for the commercial units by adding the unit owners as additional named insureds. The CC&Rs also prohibited owners and their “tenants” from procuring their own fire insurance policies for the premises. In 2013, de Carion leased his commercial space to Frances Todd, Inc. d/b/a The Wooden Duck, Eric Todd Gellerman and Amy Frances Feber (Lessees). Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams LLP and William L. Doerler, White and Williams LLP Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Doerler may be contacted at doerlerw@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Indiana Federal Court Holds No Coverage for $50M Default Judgment for Lack of Timely Notice of Class Action

    August 26, 2019 —
    In Greene v. Kenneth R. Will, a CGL insurer recently prevailed in a declaratory judgment action arising from an underlying class action alleging pollution and nuisance claims against the insured, VIM Recycling LLC, an Indiana-based waste-recycling facility.[1] “[T]his case has some whiskers on it,” the Indiana federal district court recounted in its exhaustive decision granting the insurer relief. The court relieved the insurer of indemnifying a $50 million default judgment against the insured, which, the court observed, “proved to be a bad neighbor” and “nuisance in both the legal and colloquial sense.” The court held that the insured failed to provide timely notice of the class action. “The judgment against the [insured] came about when a group of nearby homeowners decided that they had had enough of VIM’s polluting behavior and brought this class action to recover damages for environmental violations, nuisance and negligence based on the impact of the waste facility on their homes and property,” the court explained. Eventually, the court entered a default judgment against the insured for $50,568,750, plus an award of $273,339.85 in attorney’s fees. Because the insured was “judgment-proof,” the class action plaintiffs “aligned” with the insured “hoping to collect on their monumental judgment” from the insured’s CGL insurer. Within a few weeks’ time, the class action plaintiffs sued the insurer seeking a declaration of coverage for the default judgment against the insured. Reprinted courtesy of Anthony L. Miscioscia, White and Williams LLP and Timothy A. Carroll, White and Williams LLP Mr. Miscioscia may be contacted at misciosciaa@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Carroll may be contacted at carrollt@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of