BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington building expertSeattle Washington civil engineer expert witnessSeattle Washington construction claims expert witnessSeattle Washington ada design expert witnessSeattle Washington building envelope expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witness commercial buildingsSeattle Washington construction defect expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Expert Builders Information
    Seattle, Washington

    Washington Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: (SB 5536) The legislature passed a contractor protection bill that reduces contractors' exposure to lawsuits to six years from 12, and gives builders seven "affirmative defenses" to counter defect complaints from homeowners. Claimant must provide notice no later than 45 days before filing action; within 21 days of notice of claim, "construction professional" must serve response; claimant must accept or reject inspection proposal or settlement offer within 30 days; within 14 days following inspection, construction pro must serve written offer to remedy/compromise/settle; claimant can reject all offers; statutes of limitations are tolled until 60 days after period of time during which filing of action is barred under section 3 of the act. This law applies to single-family dwellings and condos.


    Building Expert Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Seattle Washington

    A license is required for plumbing, and electrical trades. Businesses must register with the Secretary of State.


    Building Expert Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    MBuilders Association of King & Snohomish Counties
    Local # 4955
    335 116th Ave SE
    Bellevue, WA 98004

    Seattle Washington Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Kitsap County
    Local # 4944
    5251 Auto Ctr Way
    Bremerton, WA 98312

    Seattle Washington Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Spokane
    Local # 4966
    5813 E 4th Ave Ste 201
    Spokane, WA 99212

    Seattle Washington Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of North Central
    Local # 4957
    PO Box 2065
    Wenatchee, WA 98801

    Seattle Washington Building Expert 10/ 10

    MBuilders Association of Pierce County
    Local # 4977
    PO Box 1913 Suite 301
    Tacoma, WA 98401

    Seattle Washington Building Expert 10/ 10

    North Peninsula Builders Association
    Local # 4927
    PO Box 748
    Port Angeles, WA 98362
    Seattle Washington Building Expert 10/ 10

    Jefferson County Home Builders Association
    Local # 4947
    PO Box 1399
    Port Hadlock, WA 98339

    Seattle Washington Building Expert 10/ 10


    Building Expert News and Information
    For Seattle Washington


    Where Breach of Contract and Tortious Interference Collide

    UCF Sues Architects and Contractors Over Stadium Construction Defects

    Ninth Circuit Finds No Coverage for Construction Defects Under California Law

    Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court Limits The Scope Of A Builder’s Implied Warranty Of Habitability

    Contract, Breach of Contract, and Material Breach of Contract

    Enforcement Of Contractual Terms (E.G., Flow-Down, Field Verification, Shop Drawing Approval, And No-Damage-For-Delay Provisions)

    Saving Manhattan: Agencies, Consultants, Contractors Join Fight to Keep New York City Above Water

    School District Client Advisory: Civility is not an Option, It is a Duty

    EEOC Focuses on Eliminating Harassment, Recruitment and Hiring Barriers in the Construction Industry

    Triggering Duty to Advance Costs Same Standard as Duty to Defend

    William Doerler Recognized by JD Supra 2022 Readers’ Choice Awards

    Experts Weigh In on Bilingual Best Practices for Jobsites

    Washington Supreme Court Upholds King County Ordinance Requiring Utility Providers to Pay for Access to County’s Right-of-Way and Signals Approval for Other Counties to Follow Suit

    Mendocino Hospital Nearing Completion

    Timely Written Notice to Insurer and Cooperating with Insurer

    Wreckage Removal Underway at Site of Collapsed Key Bridge in Baltimore, But Weather Slows Progress

    An Obligation to Provide Notice and an Opportunity to Cure May not End after Termination, and Why an Early Offer of Settlement Should Be Considered on Public Works Contracts

    Impairing Your Insurer’s Subrogation Rights

    UPDATE: ACS Obtains Additional $13.6 Million for General Contractor Client After $19.2 Million Jury Trial Victory

    Saudi Arabia Awards Contracts for Megacity Neom’s Worker Housing

    Time to Update Your Virginia Mechanic’s Lien Forms (July 1, 2019)

    THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT HAS RULED THAT THE RIGHT TO REPAIR ACT (SB800) IS THE EXCLUSIVE REMEDY FOR CONSTRUCTION DEFECT CLAIMS NOT INVOLVING PERSONAL INJURIES WHETHER OR NOT THE UNDERLYING DEFECTS GAVE RISE TO ANY PROPERTY DAMAGE in McMillin Albany LL

    A Matter Judged: Subrogating Insurers Should Beware of Prior Suits Involving the Insured

    Consequential Damages Flowing from Construction Defect Not Covered Under Florida Law

    Insurer Must Cover Construction Defects Claims under Actual Injury Rule

    FBI Makes Arrest Related to Saipan Casino Construction

    Contractor Owed a Defense

    SunTrust Will Pay $968 Million to Resolve Mortgage Probes

    Overruling Henkel, California Supreme Court Validates Assignment of Policies

    Properly Trigger the Performance Bond

    Patrick Haggerty Promoted to Counsel

    Construction Defect Risks Shifted to Insurers in 2013

    The Business of Engineering: An Interview with Matthew Loos

    Payne & Fears Recognized by Best Lawyers in 2025 Best Law Firms®

    Scarce Cemetery Space Creates Prices to Die For: Cities

    Insurance Lawyers Recognized by JD Supra 2020 Readers' Choice Awards

    Developers Can Tap into DOE’s $400 Million for Remote and Rural Clean Energy Projects

    "My Bad, I Thought It Was in Good Faith" is Not Good Enough - Contractor Ordered to Pay Prompt Payment Penalties

    Incorrect Information Provided on Insurance Application Defeats Claim for Coverage

    Construction Workers Face Dangers on the Job

    What is a “Force Majeure” Clause? Do I Need one in my Contract? Three Options For Contractors, Subcontractors and Suppliers to Consider

    Hunton’s Alice Weeks Selected to the Miami Dade Bar’s Circle of Excellence for Insurance Litigation

    Preparing the Next Generation of Skilled Construction Workers: AGC Workforce Development Plan

    Insurer's Quote on Coverage for Theft by Hacker Creates Issue of Fact

    KB Homes Sues Condo Buyers over Alleged Cybersquatting and Hacking

    Changes in the Law on Lien Waivers

    Builder Waits too Long to Dispute Contract in Construction Defect Claim

    Unwrapped Pipes Lead to Flooding and Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Consultant Says It's Time to Overhaul Construction Defect Laws in Nevada

    “A No-Lose Proposition?”
    Corporate Profile

    SEATTLE WASHINGTON BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Seattle, Washington Building Expert Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 7,000 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 Seattle'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
    Seattle, Washington

    Warning! Danger Ahead for Public Entities

    July 30, 2019 —
    Public entities are known to assert False Claims actions “to up the ante” to intimidate and aggressively address contractor construction claims. This strategy in the case of John Ross of Industrial Sheet Metal, Inc. (JRI) V. City of Los Angeles Department of Airports (LAWA), 29 Cal. App. 5th 378 (2018), backfired on the public entity, LAWA, in a big way and should serve as a warning to public entities about expanding claims to include False Claim actions. In this case, LAWA was awarded $1 in contract damages, its California False Claims Act (CFCA) claim was rejected by the jury as were JRI’s claims against LAWA. Despite losing on the substantive contract claims, the trial court found that JRI “prevailed in the action” under the relevant CFCA fee provision, Government Code 12652, subd. (g)(9)(B), regardless of JRI’s failure to prevail in the action as a whole. The California Appellate Court (hereinafter “Court”) affirmed the trial court’s finding. The CFCA is analogous to the federal False Claims Act (FFCA; 31 U.S.C. 3729 et seq.). Since the CFCA is patterned on similar federal legislation, it was appropriate for the Court to look to precedent construing this similar federal act in interpreting the CFCA provisions. Accordingly, the Court looked at the False Claims Act cases for guidance in upholding the trial court’s decision in its determination that JRI was the “prevailing party” for determining an attorney’s fees award against LAWA. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael J. Baker, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Baker may be contacted at mjbaker@swlaw.com

    Reasons to Be Skeptical About a Millennial Homebuying Boom in 2016

    December 10, 2015 —
    Predicting whether millennials are finally going to start buying homes in large numbers has become a seasonal sporting event for real estate experts (also something resembling a periodic parental nag). There's good reason for the abiding fixation. Millennials are the largest generation in the U.S. labor force and something akin to guppies in the housing market food chain: When a first-time buyer moves into an entry-level house, it lets the sellers upgrade. But they've been held back by housing price increases that outpace wage hikes, not to mention limited access to credit, and rising rents that make it harder to save for a down payment. Will next year be the year that millennials1 finally satisfy builders and real estate agents (not to mention mom and dad) by making their presence felt in the housing market? Yes, but not to the degree that many might hope. Millennials will make up the largest share of homebuyers in 2016 This is more of a demographic inevitability than a prediction. Historically, the largest share of U.S. homebuyers have been between 25 and 34 years old. Millennials will buy one out of three homes in 2016, predicts Jonathan Smoke, chief economist for Realtor.com, a small uptick from this year. If you prefer your glass half empty, though, Zillow Chief Economist Svenja Gudell thinks the median age of first-time home buyers will hit a new high next year. In either case, Americans will continue the trend of buying their first homes later in life than they did in past decades, as the chart below shows—likely due to some mix of wage stagnation, rising housing costs, and a tendency to start families later in life. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Clark, Bloomberg

    San Diego Appellate Team Prevails in Premises Liability Appeal

    December 06, 2021 —
    San Diego, Calif. (October 28, 2021) - San Diego Appellate Practice Partners Jeffry A. Miller and Corinne C. Bertsche, along with Associate Tracy D. Forbath, recently obtained a win on appeal when California's Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District, Division Four affirmed the trial court’s grant of a client homeowners association’s motion for summary judgment. In the underlying matter, the plaintiff alleged claims for premises liability and negligence for injuries he sustained when tripping over an uplift of two misaligned adjacent slabs of concrete sidewalk, measuring 1.25 inches and located next to a condominium complex. The appellate court agreed that the defect in question was a trivial defect as a matter of law, despite the plaintiff’s arguments that there was a triable issue of material fact as to whether the uplift’s dangerousness was exacerbated by the presence of aggravating factors. The appellate court found that the plaintiff’s expert declaration did not support the alleged aggravating factors with admissible evidence, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding it. Reprinted courtesy of Corinne Bertsche, Lewis Brisbois, Jeffry Miller, Lewis Brisbois and Tracy Forbath, Lewis Brisbois Ms. Bertsche may be contacted at Corinne.Bertsche@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Miller may be contacted at Jeff.Miller@lewisbrisbois.com Ms. Forbath may be contacted at Tracy.Forbath@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    How Many Bridges Does the Chesapeake Bay Need?

    August 03, 2022 —
    Steve Kline, a 7th-generation Marylander, knows well the vacation tradition of driving across the twin spans of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge for trips to the beach resort of Ocean City. His grandfather, an ironworker, helped build the bridge’s first span, which opened in 1952. He’s also very familiar with another seasonal rite: wading through the infamous miles-long traffic backups that last from Memorial Day through the end of summer. But Kline, president of the nonprofit Eastern Shore Land Conservancy, is not on board with the state’s proposed multibillion-dollar fix — a new 4.3-mile-long crossing, to be built alongside the two current spans of the Bay Bridge. In April, the Maryland Transportation Authority (MDTA) announced it had received federal approval to use this route for a potential new, wider bridge that would be likely to eventually replace its older siblings, addressing the notorious summer bottlenecks for decades to come. And on June 10, at a press conference held near the bridge’s eastbound ramp, Maryland Governor Larry Hogan announced that he would commit $28 million in bridge toll revenue to fund the second phase of an environmental impact study on the idea. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ethan McLeod, Bloomberg

    Plaintiffs In Construction Defect Cases to Recover For Emotional Damages?

    March 16, 2011 —

    A recent post to the Markusson, Green, Jarvis Blog reports on an important appeals decision which promises to impact construction defect litigation in Colorado.

    The post provides analysis on the recovery of inconvenience damages. The focus of the piece is centered on Hildebrand v. New Vista Homes II, LLC, 08CA2645, 2010 WL 4492356 (Colo. Ct. App. Nov. 10, 2010), wherein it was held that " the plain language of Construction Defect Action Reform Act permits recovery of damages for inconvenience, and that the trial court did not err by allowing inconvenience damages to go to the jury".

    According to the MGJ Blog "The Hildebrand decision is important because it provides Construction Defect Plaintiffs with a foothold for collecting emotional damages. While several questions of law remain as to who or under exactly what circumstances a Plaintiff may recover these types of damages, the Hildebrand case has clearly set forth that emotional damages may be considered as part of actual damages pursuant to CDARA."

    Read Full Story...

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

    Congratulations to Associate Madeline Arcellana on Her Selection as a Top Rank Attorney in Southern Nevada!

    July 18, 2022 —
    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP is proud to announce Senior Associate Madeline Arcellana was selected by Nevada Business Magazine as a Top Rank Attorney in Southern Nevada for her work in Civil Litigation, General Liability, and Personal Injury! The lawyers selected to Nevada Business Magazine, Top Rank Attorneys list are at the top of their field and each nomination is put through an extensive verification process, resulting in the top attorneys in Nevada who are chosen by their peers. To view Nevada’s 2022 Top Rank Attorneys, please click here. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Jury Trials: A COVID Update

    July 18, 2022 —
    JURY TRIALS. Budd v. Kaiser Gypsum Co., Inc., — Wn. App. 2d –, 505 P.3d 120 (Wash. Ct. App. 2022). (1) Courts must ensure that juries are randomly selected to provide a fair and impartial jury. (2) While the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments prohibit the systematic exclusion of distinctive groups from jury pools, Washington Courts’ COVID-19 policy to excuse people who were ages 60 and older and did not wish to report for duty was not a “systematic” exclusion. Raymond Budd developed mesothelioma after working with a drywall product called “joint compound” from 1962 to 1972. He sued Kaiser Gypsum Company, Inc. and others for damages, contending that the company’s joint compound caused his illness. A jury returned a verdict in Budd’s favor and awarded him nearly $13.5 million. Kaiser appeals, claiming (1) insufficient randomness in the jury-selection process, (2) erroneous transcription of expert testimony, (3) lack of proximate causation, (4) lack of medical causation, (5) an improper jury instruction on defective design, (6) improper exclusion of sexual battery and marital discord evidence, (7) improper admission of post-exposure evidence, (8) improper exclusion of regulatory provisions, and (9) a failure to link its product to Budd’s disease. The Court of Appeals, Division 1, affirmed the verdict in favor of Budd. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Joshua Lane, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Lane may be contacted at joshua.lane@acslawyers.com

    Design Firm Settles over Construction Defect Claim

    July 31, 2013 —
    A Pennsylvania township has announced that it has reached a settlement with the architectural firm that designed its administration building. Cee Jay Frederick Associates will be paying than $1.05 million to settle claims of defects in the design of the building. West Whiteland’s administration building was completed in July 2007. The first leaks were noticed in November and December 2008. In response, the township stopped payments to the contractor, Magnum, Inc. Magnum sued, claiming that their work was not to blame for the leaks. Magnum joined the township in suing the design firm. Although Cee Jay Frederick Associates will be paying the township to settle the claim, West Whiteland will be paying $75,000 of that back to the firm to settle outstanding bills that had been withheld during litigation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of