BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington slope failure expert witnessSeattle Washington soil failure expert witnessSeattle Washington construction claims expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witness concrete failureSeattle Washington engineering expert witnessSeattle Washington architectural expert witnessSeattle Washington building code 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


    Domtar Update

    Does Arbitration Apply to Contemporaneously Executed Contracts (When One of the Contracts Does Not Have an Arbitration Provision)?

    Court Extends Insurer Rights to Equitable Contribution

    Housing Markets Continue to Improve

    Water Damage: Construction’s Often Unnoticed Threat

    The Construction Industry Lost Jobs (No Surprise) but it Gained Some Too (Surprise)

    Quick Note: October 1, 2023 Changes to Florida’s Construction Statutes

    Death, Taxes and Attorneys’ Fees in Construction Disputes

    Homeowner Has No Grounds to Avoid Mechanics Lien

    ASHRAE Seeks Comments by May 26 on Draft of Pathogen Mitigation Standard

    Gloria Gaynor Sues Contractor over Defective Deck Construction

    What If There Is a Design Error?

    Still Going, After All This Time: the Sacketts, EPA and the Clean Water Act

    California Supreme Court Holds “Notice-Prejudice” Rule is “Fundamental Public Policy” of California, May Override Choice of Law Provisions in Policies

    Contractors and Owners Will Have an Easier Time Identifying Regulated Wetlands Following Recent U.S. Supreme Court Opinion

    What You Should Know About Liquidated Damages and Liability Caps for Delay and Performance Liquidated Damages

    Multiple Construction Errors Contributed to Mexico Subway Collapse

    Be Strategic When Suing a Manufacturer Under a Warranty with an Arbitration Provision

    ‘Revamp the Camps’ Cabins Displayed at the CA State Fair

    Consulting Firm Indicted and Charged with Falsifying Concrete Reports

    Start-up to Streamline Large-Scale Energy Renovation

    Canada Home Resales Post First Fall in Eight Months

    FIFA Inspecting Brazil’s World Cup Stadiums

    Texas Court Requires Insurer to Defend GC Despite Breach of Contract Exclusion

    Acquisition, Development, and Construction Lending Conditions Ease

    BHA has a Nice Swing: Firm Supports Wounded Warrior Project at WCC Seminar

    New York Appellate Court Applies Broad Duty to Defend to Property Damage Case

    Techniques for Resolving Construction Disputes

    World’s Biggest Crane Gets to Work at British Nuclear Plant

    PA Supreme Court to Rule on Scope of Judges' Credibility Determinations

    Reminder: Quantum Meruit and Breach of Construction Contract Don’t Mix

    San Diego Appellate Team Prevails in Premises Liability Appeal

    New Jersey Court Rules on Statue of Repose Case

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (08/15/23) – Manufacturing Soars with CHIPS Act, New Threats to U.S. Infrastructure and AI Innovation for One Company

    Partners Jeremy S. Macklin and Mark F. Wolfe Secure Seventh Circuit Win for Insurer Client in Late Notice Dispute

    New York High Court: “Issued or Delivered” Includes Policies Insuring Risks in New York

    Increasing Use of Construction Job Cameras

    Five Types of Structural Systems in High Rise Buildings

    #1 CDJ Topic: McMillin Albany LLC v Superior Court of California

    The Black Woman Architect Who Hopes to Change the Face of Design in America

    Appetite for Deconstruction

    How AB5 has Changed the Employment Landscape

    Over a Hundred Thousand Superstorm Sandy Cases Re-Opened

    Burden of Proof Under All-Risk Property Insurance Policy

    Maintenance Issues Ignite Arguments at Indiana School

    President Trump Repeals Contractor “Blacklisting” Rule

    More Charges Anticipated in Las Vegas HOA Scam

    Manhattan Developer Wants Claims Dismissed in Breach of Contract Suit

    California Supreme Court Upholds Precondemnation Procedures

    Several Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in Sacramento Magazine 2022 Top Lawyers!
    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

    Court Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Construction Defect Suit

    September 01, 2011 —

    The California Court of Appeals has upheld the denial of an anti-SLAPP motion in Claredon American Insurance Company v. Bishop, Barry, Howe, Haney & Ryder. This case was triggered by a water intrusion problem at a condominium complex, the Terraces at Emerystation, built and sold by Wareham Development Corporation. The insurer, Claredon, retained Risk Enterprise Management as the third party claims administrator. REM retained the law firm Bishop, Barry, Howe, Haney & Ryder. The construction defect case was settled in 2007 and the condo owners moved back by early 2008.

    Due to issues with the claims settlement, Claredon filed against REM for “professional negligence, indemnity, apportionment and contribution,” with a cross-complaint that the cross-defendants negligently defended the developer, Wareham.

    In response, the cross-defendants filed a motion to strike the cross-complaint under the anti-SLAPP statute. The trial court denied this motion and now this has been upheld by the appeals court.

    The court noted that “The fundamental thrust of the cross-complaint is not protected litigation-related speech and petitioning activity undertaken on another’s behalf in a judicial proceeding.”

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Sean Shecter to Join American University Environmental and Energy Law Alumni Advisory Council

    November 01, 2021 —
    Fort Lauderdale, Fla. (October 6, 2021) – Fort Lauderdale Partner Sean P. Shecter will join his alma mater American University Washington College of Law’s Environmental and Energy Law Alumni Advisory Council, advising on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) related issues and helping support the program. The Program on Environmental and Energy Law (PEEL) provides an interdisciplinary education on domestic environmental, energy, and natural resources law, international and comparative environmental and energy law, environmental and climate justice, and animal law. Its mission is to foster passion for the environment and cultivate legal excellence, cultural competency, and global awareness. “The professors, staff, and members of the PEEL are global leaders in their field, and so it is an absolute privilege to reconnect with my law school so that I can help support this amazing program,” said Mr. Schecter on the invitation. “I am also looking forward to counseling students on issues concerning the accurate reporting of ESG data and the intersection between ESG and my white collar practice.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    A Contractual Liability Exclusion Doesn't Preclude Insurer's Duty to Indemnify

    November 05, 2014 —
    According to Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP's blog, "[I]n Crownover v. Mid-Continent Cas. Co., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 20737 (5th Cir. October 29, 2014), the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit withdrew its prior ruling and held that the contractual liability exclusion did not preclude an insurer’s duty to indemnify its insured for an award resulting from the insured’s defective construction." The case involved the Crownovers who were awarded damages for "Arrow's breach of paragraph 23.1 of the construction contract." However, Arrow then filed for bankruptcy. Mid-Continent, Arrow's insurer, denied Crownovers' demand for recovery, stating that "the contractual liability exclusion applied because the arbitrator’s award to the Crownovers was based only on Arrow’s breach of paragraph 23.1 of the construction agreement." The court agreed with Mid-Continent. Subsequently, the fifth court of appeals "reversed the district court’s ruling and awarded summary judgment in favor of the Crownovers." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (1/10/24) – New Type of Nuclear Reactor, Big Money Surrounding Sports Stadiums, and Positivity from Fannie Mae’s Monthly Consumer Survey

    February 05, 2024 —
    In our latest roundup, the commercial real estate market poses a risk to financial stability, New York City moves towards net-zero building emissions, workers at several Los Angeles area hotels tentatively agree to a new contract, and more! Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Joint Venture Dispute Over Profits

    January 27, 2020 —
    A recent Georgia Court of Appeals case demonstrates the risk of joint ventures failing to carefully define accounting rules in their joint venture agreement. Two trade contractors teamed up to accomplish certain tasks on a job at a wastewater lift station at Fort Gordon. A joint venture agreement provided for an equal split of the profits and losses. Unfortunately, the parties did not define “profit,” and particularly did not define what cost would be deducted in calculating profit. They disputed in particular whether certain large payments to individuals and 15% overhead charges should be deducted in calculating profits. One party presented the expert testimony of an accountant while the other did not. The party presenting expert testimony asked the court to dismiss the other party’s claim because it was not supported by expert testimony of an accountant. The trial court granted the motion and dismissed the claim. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David R. Cook, Autry, Hall & Cook, LLP
    Mr. Cook may be contacted at cook@ahclaw.com

    Do Construction Contracts and Fraud Mix After All?

    October 27, 2016 —
    On several occasions here at Construction Law Musings, I’ve discussed the fact that, with a few exceptions, fraud claims and written construction contract based claims do not mix. One of the exceptions to the so called “economic loss rule” that would seem to preclude both fraud and contract claims in the same lawsuit is where fraud is used to induce the contract in the first place. This exception would only apply where an independent duty, wholly outside of the duties created by the contract, is properly plead and proven to the court. For the same reason, namely a separate duty outside of the contract, the Virginia Consumer Protection Act (“VCPA”) may allow for an exception that would allow a cause of action under this statute. Up until recently, the courts of Virginia have used these exceptions sparingly. However, the recent Loudoun County, VA Circuit Court opinion in Interbuild, Inc. v. Sayers (opinion also found at Virginia Lawyers Weekly) may signal a broadening of these exceptions. In the Interbuild case, the Court considered a claim for fraud in the inducement and breach of the VCPA. The basic facts plead by the plaintiffs were that Interbuild induced them into the contract through statements that it had been an es­tablished business since 1981, the project did not require a building permit, it had obtained all necessary subcontractor pric­es and would provide full-time project su­pervision, the project would be completed within 16 weeks, 4000 PSI concrete would be used for the project and that the proj­ect would be located in the agreed-upon area depicted and that they reasonably relied on these representations in deciding to enter into the contract to build their recreational facility. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill, PC
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Presenting a “Total Time” Delay Claim Is Not Sufficient

    September 12, 2022 —
    When presenting a delay-type of claim on a construction project, a claimant MUST be in a position to properly PROVE the claim. Trying to present a delay claim loosey-goosey is not a recipe for success. In fact, it can be a recipe for an easy loss. This is not what you want. To combat this, make sure you engage a delay expert that understands delay methodologies and how to calculate delay and do NOT present a total time claim. Presenting a delay claim using a total time approach, discussed below, makes it too easy to attack the flaws and credibility of the approach. Per the discussion of the case below, a total time claim with a contractor that used its project manager, versus a delay expert, to support its claim turned the contractor’s claim into a loss. In French Construction, LLC v. Department of Veteran Affairs, 2022 WL 3134507, CBCA 6490 (CBCA 2022), a contractor submitted a delay claim to the government for almost $400,000. The contractor was hired to construct a two-story corridor to connect hospital buildings. The contractor was required to be complete within 365 days. It was not. The contractor was seeking 419 days of delay from the government. The contractor’s “delay expert” was its project manager who compared the contractor’s as-planned schedule to an as-built schedule he prepared for the claim. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Contractual Setoff and Application When Performance Bond Buys Out of its Exposure

    July 02, 2024 —
    The theory of “setoff” is an important theory in construction disputes. Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal recently provided worthy discussion on contractual setoffs:
    Setoffs in contract claims are governed by [Florida Statute] section 46.015(2), which provides that if a plaintiff has released “any person in partial satisfaction of the damages sued for, the court shall [setoff] this amount from the amount of any judgment to which the plaintiff would be otherwise entitled at the time of rendering judgment.” The setoff statute intends to prohibit plaintiffs from getting double recoveries.
    A setoff requires that settling and non-settling parties be jointly and severally liable. The settled damages must also be the same damages for which the setoff is sought; stated differently, a setoff is not proper where the trial damages to be setoff are separate and distinct from the settled damages.
    Close Construction, LLC v. City of Riviera Beach Utility Special District, 49 Fla.L.Weekly D1184d (Fla. 4th DCA 2024) (internal citations omitted). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com