BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington construction project management expert witnessesSeattle Washington construction expert witness public projectsSeattle Washington construction expert witnessSeattle Washington defective construction expertSeattle Washington testifying construction expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witnesses fenestrationSeattle Washington architectural 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


    Insurer Sued for Altering Policies after Claim

    California Pipeline Disaster Brings More Scandal for PG&E

    US Supreme Court Orders All Mountain Valley Gas Line Work to Proceed

    David M. McLain, Esq. to Speak at the 2014 CLM Claims College

    Hundreds Celebrated the Grand Opening of the Associated Builders and Contractors of Southern California Riverside Construction Training Center

    Duty to Defend Negligent Misrepresentation Claim

    4 Ways to Mitigate Construction Disputes

    Heads I Win, Tails You Lose. Court Finds Indemnity Provision Went Too Far

    Federal Government Partial Shutdown – Picking Up the Pieces

    2020s Most Read Construction Law Articles

    Champagne Wishes and Caviar Dreams. Unlicensed Contractor Takes the Cake

    A Property Boom Is Coming to China's Smaller Cities

    Avoid Delay or Get Ready to Pay: The Risks of “Time-Is-of-The-Essence” Clauses

    Homebuilder Confidence Takes a Beating

    Colorado Court of Appeals Decides the Triple Crown Case

    World's Longest Suspension Bridge Takes Shape in Turkey

    Prison Contractors Did Not Follow the Law

    Terminating Notice of Commencement Without Contractor’s Final Payment Affidavit

    Discussion of the Discovery Rule and Tolling Statute of Limitations

    San Francisco Office Secures Defense Verdict in Legal Malpractice Action

    Construction Halted in Wisconsin Due to Alleged Bid Issues

    Richest NJ Neighborhood Fights Plan for Low-Cost Homes on Toxic Dump

    Denial of Claim for Concealment or Fraud Reversed by Sixth Circuit

    Intellectual Property And Employment Law Best Practices: Are You Covering Your Bases In Protecting Construction-Related Trade Secrets?

    Preparing Your Business For Internal Transition

    Sometimes, Being too Cute with Pleading Allegations is Unnecessary

    South Carolina Contractors Regain General Liability Coverage

    Quick Note: Staying, Not Dismissing, Arbitrable Disputes Under Federal Arbitration Act

    "Is the Defective Work Covered by Insurance?"

    Retainage on Pennsylvania Public Contracts

    Illinois Supreme Court Holds that Constructions Defects May Constitute “Property Damage” Caused By An “Occurrence” Under Standard CGL Policy, Overruling Prior Appellate Court Precedent

    Ready, Fire, Aim: The Importance of Targeting Your Delay Notices

    Is the Issuance of a City Use Permit Referable? Not When It Is an Administrative Act

    Will Colorado Pass a Construction Defect Reform Bill in 2016?

    Even Where Fraud and Contract Mix, Be Careful With Timing

    Practical Pointers for Change Orders on Commercial Construction Contracts

    Homebuilders Leading U.S. Consumer Stocks: EcoPulse

    How a Maryland County Created the Gold Standard for Building Emissions Reduction

    Safe and Safer

    Michigan Lawmakers Pass $4.7B Infrastructure Spending Bill

    The Real Estate Crisis in North Dakota's Man Camps

    The Godfather of Solar Predicts Its Future

    California Governor Signs SB 496 Amending California’s Anti-Indemnity Statute

    U.S. District Court for Hawaii Again Determines Construction Defect Claims Do Not Arise From An Occurrence

    It’s a Jolly Time of the Year: 5 Tips for Dealing with Construction Labor Issues During the Holidays

    Insurance Agent Sued for Lapse in Coverage after House Collapses

    Lewis Brisbois Promotes 35 to Partnership

    Updates to Residential Landlord Tenant Law

    Is a Violation of a COVID-19 Order the Basis For Civil Liability?

    Legislatures Shouldn’t Try to Do the Courts’ Job
    Corporate Profile

    SEATTLE WASHINGTON BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Seattle, Washington Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Seattle'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
    Seattle, Washington

    Courts Are Ordering Remote Depositions as the COVID-19 Pandemic Continues

    August 10, 2020 —
    The COVID-19 pandemic has generally put a stop to in-person depositions nationwide. Many litigants and their attorneys have also resisted attempts to proceed with remote video depositions, some holding out for the pandemic to subside and for the return of in-person business as usual while others are resistant to using new or unfamiliar virtual video technology. However, with COVID-19 cases still increasing nationwide, courts are beginning to mandate that depositions proceed remotely regardless of these apprehensions. It looks like remote video depositions may become part of a new set of best practices and perhaps mandatory in some circumstances for the foreseeable future. The Supreme Court of New Jersey, for example, has ordered that “[t]o the extent practicable . . . depositions should continue to be conducted remotely using necessary and available video technology.” The court has not explicitly mandated remote depositions, but has certainly encouraged trial courts to do so, indicating in orders litigants are “strongly encouraged” to depose witnesses remotely. Other jurisdictions, such as Philadelphia’s First Judicial District, have given trial court’s similar authority and flexibility. Recently, a trial court in Middlesex County, New Jersey granted a motion to compel a defense deposition of the plaintiff to proceed remotely, if not in person, over the objection of plaintiff’s counsel in a slip-and-fall case. This is one of the first such rulings in this area. The plaintiff’s counsel objected to the remote deposition on the grounds that his client was elderly with a heavy accent, had no technology knowledge, and had no internet access. That would seem to be a pretty good argument that a remote deposition would be impracticable. However, the defendant bolstered their case with an offer to cover the cost of renting and delivering a remote deposition technology package to the plaintiff, complete with a tablet, phone, speaker, internet hotspot and remote training beforehand. Although the trial court acknowledged the plaintiff’s “significant hardship,” the court ordered that the deposition proceed remotely if not in person. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams attorneys Robert Devine, Douglas Weck and Victor Zarrilli Mr. Devine may be contacted at deviner@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Weck may be contacted at weckd@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Zarrilli may be contacted at zarrilliv@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Can Businesses Resolve Construction Disputes Outside of Court?

    August 19, 2024 —
    Time is of the essence in any construction project. So, if a dispute arises at any point, business owners generally wish to avoid the chance of a time-consuming case going to court. Can California construction businesses manage these disputes effectively outside of court? It is possible in some cases. Business owners should carefully consider these three steps. 1. Go Back to the Contract Even if the contract is at the center of the dispute, it is important to refer to any details regarding dispute resolution included within the document. It is common for contracts to have some form of a dispute resolution clause. In such a case, both parties should follow the steps outlined in that agreement. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Scott L. Baker, Baker & Associates
    Mr. Baker may be contacted at slb@bakerslaw.com

    New Jersey Supreme Court Rules that Subcontractor Work with Resultant Damage is both an “Occurrence” and “Property Damage” under a Standard Form CGL Policy

    September 01, 2016 —
    According to a client alert by the firm Peckar & Abramson, P.C. (P&A), “In a recent significant decision, the Supreme Court of New Jersey held that defective work of a subcontractor that causes consequential property damage is both an ‘occurrence’ and ‘property damage’ under the terms of a standard form commercial general liability (“CGL”) insurance policy.” Patrick J. Greene, Jr., and Frank A. Hess of P&A wrote that the Cypress Point Condominium Assoc., Inc. v Adria Towers, LLC, 2016 N.J. Lexis 847 (Aug.4,2016) “decision is important in New Jersey and in other jurisdictions that had relied upon the influential New Jersey case, Weedo v. Stone–E–Brick, Inc., 81 N.J. 233 (1979), that had determined that such claims involved non-insured ‘business risks.’” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Design Immunity Does Not Shield Public Entity From Claim That it Failed to Warn of a Dangerous Condition

    May 17, 2021 —
    Readers of this blog are familiar with the concept of the design immunity defense. Codified at Government Code section 830.6, it provides in pertinent that a public entity is not liable for an injury caused by a plan or design of a public improvement where the plan or design has been “approved in advance . . . by the legislative body of the public entity or by some other body or employee exercising discretionary authority to give such approval or where such plan or design is prepared in conformity with standards previously so approved” if the trial or appellate court finds that there “is any substantial evidence upon the basis of which (a) a reasonable public employee could have adopted the plan or design or the standards therefor or (b) a reasonable legislative body or other body or employee could have approved the plan or design or the standards therefor.” In the next case, Tansavatdi v. City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Case No. B293670 (January 29, 2021), the 2nd District Court of Appeal examined whether the design immunity defense also serves as a defense to a claim that a public entity has a duty to warn of a dangerous condition on public property. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    DRCOG’s Findings on the Impact of Construction Defect Litigation Have Been Released (And the Results Should Not Surprise You)

    November 13, 2013 —
    The downward trend in attached-housing construction in Colorado is well-known and discussed often within the region’s construction, insurance, finance, and legal communities. In recent years, builders and insurers in particular have striven to bring greater awareness to local governments and lawmakers regarding the impact that construction defect lawsuits have on the builders’ ability to introduce desirable, affordable, yet cost-efficient attached-housing options, such as condominiums and townhomes, into the marketplace. The Denver Regional Council of Governments (“DRCOG”) has been aware of the builders’ and insurers’ plight, largely because of the impact that the scarcity of affordable attached-housing has had on their respective communities. On October 29th, DRCOG released its long-awaited Denver Metro Area Housing Diversity Study, prepared by Economic & Planning Systems, Inc., which investigated the factors contributing to the recent (downward) attached-housing development trends and conditions. The Study evaluated factors including changing financing and insurance requirements for builders and homebuyers, the impacts of foreclosures, changes in prospective homebuyer demographics, economic conditions which limit options for prospective homebuyers, and the costs and risks associated with construction defect regulations and lawsuits. Despite the retorts and rebukes of the naysayers, the negative impact of construction defect regulations and lawsuits on Colorado’s housing market is significant. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Derek Lindenschmidt
    Derek Lindenschmidt can be contacted at lindenschmidt@hhmrlaw.com

    Contractor's Agreement to Perform Does Not Preclude Coverage Under Contractual Liability Exclusion

    January 31, 2014 —
    In a much anticipated decision, the Texas Supreme Court ruled that a general contractor who agrees to perform its work in a good and workmanlike manner does not "assume liability" for damages arising out of its defective work so as to trigger the Contractual Liability Exclusion. Ewing Constr. Co., Inc. v. Amerisure Ins. Co., 2014 Tex. LEXIS 39 (Tex. Jan.17, 2014). Ewing signed an agreement with the School District to serve as general contractor to renovate and build additions to a school, including tennis courts. After construction was completed, the tennis courts started flaking, crumbling, and cracking. The School District filed suit, alleging breach of contract and negligence. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    17 Snell & Wilmer Attorneys Ranked In The 2019 Legal Elite Edition Of Nevada Business Magazine

    July 01, 2019 —
    Snell & Wilmer is pleased to announce that 17 of its attorneys in the Nevada offices have been ranked in Nevada Business Magazine’s 2019 Legal Elite edition, an annual list that highlights Nevada’s top attorneys as chosen by their peers. This year marks Legal Elite’s 12th year of presenting the Silver State’s top attorneys. Polling for Legal Elite 2019 began at the end of February and nearly 5,000 nominations were submitted by licensed attorneys in Nevada, according to Nevada Business Magazine. Each submission then went through an extensive verification process resulting in the top attorneys in the state, chosen by their peers. The Legal Elite list includes only the top 3 percent of attorneys in the state broken down by location. In addition, Legal Elite includes special lists ranking Nevada’s best “Up and Coming” and best government attorneys. Each nominee went through several levels of verification and scrutiny before being approved to appear on this list. Upon the nomination process closing, each ballot was individually reviewed for eligibility and every voting attorney was verified with the State Bar of Nevada. More information on the scoring can be viewed here. The following Snell & Wilmer attorneys have been named Legal Elite for 2019: The following Snell & Wilmer attorneys have been named Best Up and Coming for 2019: Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Snell & Wilmer

    Atlanta Office Wins Defense Verdict For Property Manager On Claims By Vendor, Cross-Claims By Property Owner

    January 08, 2024 —
    Atlanta, Ga. (December 18, 2023) – Atlanta Partner Adi Allushi and Associate Cecilia Walker recently secured a defense verdict for a national property management corporation on claims brought by a vendor and cross-claims lodged by the property owner. Lewis Brisbois’ client is a national corporation, over a century old, that managed over 140 properties with 40,000 units. In 2019, the client entered the Georgia market managing three apartment complexes owned by a hedge fund in New York. The owner terminated without cause the client within six months, and several vendors – including the plaintiff, who was a remedial services provider – were not paid during the last few months and the transition period. The plaintiff sued the owner for the unpaid services, as well as an incorrect entity it believed to be the client. The owner cross-claimed against the client for fraudulent misrepresentations. Based on the misnomer statute, the court granted default judgment against the client. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois