BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction expert witness Fremont County Wyoming low-income housing expert witness Fremont County Wyoming condominium expert witness Fremont County Wyoming condominiums expert witness Fremont County Wyoming housing expert witness Fremont County Wyoming production housing expert witness Fremont County Wyoming concrete tilt-up expert witness Fremont County Wyoming multi family housing expert witness Fremont County Wyoming townhome construction expert witness Fremont County Wyoming mid-rise construction expert witness Fremont County Wyoming custom homes expert witness Fremont County Wyoming casino resort expert witness Fremont County Wyoming Medical building expert witness Fremont County Wyoming tract home expert witness Fremont County Wyoming custom home expert witness Fremont County Wyoming structural steel construction expert witness Fremont County Wyoming high-rise construction expert witness Fremont County Wyoming hospital construction expert witness Fremont County Wyoming Subterranean parking expert witness Fremont County Wyoming industrial building expert witness Fremont County Wyoming parking structure expert witness Fremont County Wyoming landscaping construction expert witness Fremont County Wyoming
    Fremont County Wyoming fenestration expert witnessFremont County Wyoming expert witness structural engineerFremont County Wyoming construction claims expert witnessFremont County Wyoming architectural expert witnessFremont County Wyoming delay claim expert witnessFremont County Wyoming structural concrete expertFremont County Wyoming construction project management expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Roofing Expert Witness Builders Information
    Fremont County, Wyoming

    Wyoming Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Case law precedent


    Roofing Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Fremont County Wyoming

    State license is required for electrical trades only. All other licensing is done at the local level.


    Roofing Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Converse Co Chapter
    Local # 5230
    PO Box 714 739 East Antelope Road
    Douglas, WY 82633
    Fremont County Wyoming Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Converse Co Chapter
    Local # 5230
    PO Box 714 739 East Antelope Road
    Douglas, WY 82633
    Fremont County Wyoming Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Southeast Wyoming Builders Association
    Local # 5210
    1819 Warren Avenue
    Cheyenne, WY 82001

    Fremont County Wyoming Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Southeast Wyoming Builders Association
    Local # 5210
    1819 Warren Avenue
    Cheyenne, WY 82001

    Fremont County Wyoming Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Wyoming Home Builders Association
    Local # 5200
    PO Box 646
    Sheridan, WY 82801
    Fremont County Wyoming Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Big Horn Home Builders Association
    Local # 5250
    23 North Scott Ste 14
    Sheridan, WY 82801

    Fremont County Wyoming Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Wyoming Home Builders Association
    Local # 5200
    PO Box 646
    Sheridan, WY 82801
    Fremont County Wyoming Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Roofing Expert Witness News and Information
    For Fremont County Wyoming


    Baby Boomer Housing Deficit Coming?

    Firm Claims Construction Defects in Hawaiian Homes

    Navigating the DOT’s Interim Final Rule on DBE Certification Standards - and Preparing for the (Bumpy) Road Ahead

    Mass-Timber Furnished Apartments Fare Well in Fire Tests

    Recent Developments with California’s Right to Repair Act

    Tech Focus: Water Tech Getting Smarter

    Gatluak Ramdiet Named to The National Black Lawyers’ “Top 40 Under 40” List

    Wood Wizardry in Oregon: Innovation Raises the Roof for PDX Terminal

    Insured Does Not Prevail on Summary Judgment Motion Invoking Ensuing Loss Provision

    Flushing Away Liability: What the Aqua Engineering Case Means for Contractors and Subcontractors

    Perez Broke Records … But Should He Have Settled Earlier?

    Damages or Injury “Likely to Occur” or “Imminent” May No Longer Trigger Insurance Coverage

    General Contractor’s Professional Malpractice/Negligence Claim Against Design Professional

    Groundbreaking New York Law Regulates Third-Party Litigation Funding for the First Time

    Time is of the Essence, Even When the Contract Doesn’t Say So

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

    Nancy Conrad to Serve as President of the Pennsylvania Bar Association

    Subcontractors on Washington Public Projects can now get their Retainage Money Sooner

    Economic Loss Rule Bars Claims Against Manufacturer

    Skyline Bling: A $430 Million Hairpin Tower and Other Naked Bids for Tourism

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces Three New Partners

    The Future Has Arrived: New Technologies in Construction

    Filing Motion to Increase Lien Transfer Bond (Before Trial Court Loses Jurisdiction Over Final Judgment)

    Dispute between City and Construction Company Over Unsightly Arches

    EPA Threatens Cut in California's Federal Highway Funds

    Keep It Simple: Summarize (Voluminous Evidence, That Is...)

    Wildfires Threaten to Make Home Insurance Unaffordable

    Whose Lease Is It Anyway: Physical Occupancy Not Required in Landlord-Tenant Dispute

    Estoppel Certificate? Estop and Check Your Lease

    Homeowner Allowed to Amend Complaint to Demonstrate Third-Party Beneficiary Status Under Lender-Placed Policy

    Update Your California Release Provisions to Include Amended Section 1542 Language

    Conditional Payment Bond Consideration-Make Sure There Is Pay-If-Paid Provision

    History and Gentrification Clash in a Gilded Age Resort

    BP Is Not an Additional Insured Under Transocean's Policy

    Hurricane Warning: Florida and Southeastern US Companies – It is Time to Activate Your Hurricane Preparedness Plan and Review Key Insurance Deadlines

    Loss of Use From Allegedly Improper Drainage System Triggers Defense Under CGL Policy

    Ivanhoe Cambridge Plans Toronto Office Towers, Terminal

    Court Holds That Parent Corporation Lacks Standing to Sue Subsidiary’s Insurers for Declaratory Relief

    Construction Continues To Boom Across The South

    Homebuilding Design Goes 3D

    Hirer Not Liable Under Privette Doctrine Where Hirer Had Knowledge of Condition, but not that Condition Posed a Concealed Hazard

    New York Court Finds Insurers Cannot Recover Defense Costs Where No Duty to Indemnify

    ASCE Statement on EPA Lead Pipe and Paint Action Plan

    Work without Permits may lead to Problems Later

    Include Contract Clauses for Protection Against Ever-Evolving Construction Challenges

    New Jersey Courts Speed Up Sandy Litigation

    South Carolina Supreme Court Asked Whether Attorney-Client Privilege Waived When Insurer Denies Bad Faith

    Employee or Independent Contractor? New Administrator’s Interpretation Issued by Department of Labor Provides Guidance

    Condominiums and Homeowners Associations Remain Popular Housing Choices for U-S Homeowners

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (04/18/23) – Clean Energy, Critical Infrastructure and Commercial Concerns
    Corporate Profile

    FREMONT COUNTY WYOMING ROOFING EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fremont County, Wyoming Roofing Expert Witness Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Roofing Expert Witness News & Info
    Fremont County, Wyoming

    A Win for Clarity: What a Recent Federal Court Decision Means for Davis-Bacon Compliance

    July 13, 2026 —
    Following the Department of Labor’s 2023 Davis-Bacon rule changes, federal construction contractors faced a pressing question: not whether paying prevailing wages is required, but how far those obligations could extend. Could they reach off-site material suppliers? Delivery drivers? Contracts that omitted Davis-Bacon clauses entirely? A recent federal court decision in AGC of America v. US Department of Labor answers these questions in important ways, vacating several disputed provisions and giving contractors greater certainty when pricing, bidding, and administering federal construction projects. The ruling addresses three aspects of the 2023 regulations that sought to extend Davis-Bacon obligations beyond their traditional scope. By vacating those provisions, the decision creates a more predictable compliance environment and reinforces an important principle: Davis-Bacon enforcement works best when contractors, workers, and regulators operate under clear, objective rules. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Stephen E. Irving, Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Mr. Irving may be contacted at sirving@pecklaw.com

    EPA Steps Back, Arizona Moves Forward

    May 12, 2026 —
    In a significant development for Arizona’s business community and environmental policymakers, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has paused its planned reclassification of Maricopa County from “Moderate” to “Serious” ozone nonattainment status pursuant to the Clean Air Act’s National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). This decision marks a shift in federal air policy — one that recognizes the unique challenges faced by regions like metro Phoenix, where environmental conditions beyond local control are often key contributors to air quality readings. The EPA’s move follows a series of meetings between EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, Arizona elected officials, and business and civic leaders, including a recent roundtable in Phoenix convened by U.S. Senator Mark Kelly. In announcing the pause, Zeldin acknowledged the need for flexibility and fairness in the application of Clean Air Act standards, especially when emissions from other states, nations, and natural events significantly influence local air quality. Reprinted courtesy of Patrick J. Paul, Snell & Wilmer, John Habib, Snell & Wilmer and Sukhmani K. Singh, Snell & Wilmer Mr. Paul may be contacted at ppaul@swlaw.com Mr. Habib may be contacted at jhabib@swlaw.com Ms. Singh may be contacted at ssingh@swlaw.com Read the full story...

    Arizona Court Enters $323 Million Judgment Against ZOM Living Following Unanimous Jury Verdict

    May 26, 2026 —
    PHOENIX, May 19, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- A Maricopa County court has entered a $323 million compensatory damages judgment in favor of Gray Development Group against ZOM Holding Inc., doing business as ZOM Living, following a 12-day trial, a unanimous jury verdict and post-trial proceedings related to a proposed business transaction. The jury found ZOM liable on claims of breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing stemming from a proposed joint venture tied to a planned pipeline of luxury multifamily and commercial projects in Phoenix and Scottsdale. The lawsuit centered on a 13-project, $1.4 billion development pipeline originated and planned by Gray Development Group over more than a decade. In 2019, Gray invited Florida-based ZOM to participate in a joint venture involving the completion of five projects, which would have marked ZOM's entry into the Arizona market. According to court findings presented at trial, the companies entered into a mutual confidentiality and non-circumvention agreement before Gray shared extensive sensitive and proprietary information related to the projects, including planning, market analysis, costs, financial data, local business relationships and operational strategies developed by Gray over decades in Arizona. Evidence presented during trial showed that over a 10-month period while under contract, ZOM made hundreds of requests for confidential project and market information before circumventing Gray and pursuing the projects independently, ultimately displacing Gray from projects it spent years planning and developing. ZOM Living, headquartered in Orlando, develops multifamily and senior housing communities across the United States and operates regional offices in Boston, Dallas, Fort Lauderdale, Nashville, Phoenix, and Raleigh. ZOM is owned by Timeless Investments, the Amsterdam-based family office of Dutch businessman Hans van Veggel, which acquired the company in 1997. About Gray Development Group Gray Development Group was founded by architect Bruce Gray in 1991. The Phoenix-based company was the top-ranked multifamily developer in Arizona for more than a decade. The company designed and developed more than 15,000 apartment and condominium units throughout metropolitan Phoenix. Two Gray-designed developments — a Tempe midrise and a San Diego high-rise — received National Apartment Community of the Year awards.

    Oracle's $16B Michigan Data Center Secures Financing as Power Contracts Face Appeals

    June 08, 2026 —
    A $16 billion hyperscale data center under construction outside Ann Arbor, Mich., has secured financing backed by Blackstone and other institutional investors, even as the project's power supply agreements now face a legal challenge before the Michigan Court of Appeals. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bryan Gottlieb, Engineering News-Record
    Mr. Gottlieb may be contacted at gottliebb@enr.com

    Self-Healing Infrastructure Could Pave the Road to the Future

    May 05, 2026 —
    A single hairline crack in a bridge deck can seem insignificant. But left undetected, minor cracks and fissures expand, water seeps in, steel corrodes and repair costs start to increase. This risk multiplies across thousands of miles of aging highways and bridges nationwide. As infrastructure endures increasing strain from heavier traffic, extreme weather and deferred maintenance, engineers are exploring “self-healing” systems, where streets and bridges are built with materials that can repair themselves. Concrete, asphalt and composites capable of detecting and mending microcracks autonomously are moving from laboratory research to pilot projects. But while emerging technology promises longer-lasting infrastructure, it also raises questions about long-term maintenance, performance guarantees, procurement frameworks and risk allocation. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Allan C. Van Vliet, Pillsbury
    Mr. Van Vliet may be contacted at allan.vanvliet@pillsburylaw.com

    Contract Interpretation – Determining What the Contract Requires

    March 24, 2026 —
    A good ole dispute on contract interpretation in government contracting. Contract interpretation disputes happen all the time in every jurisdiction under the sun. Think about that. Now, what’s the best way to avoid a contract interpretation dispute? Naturally, invest in the contract language and fully understand the scope of work. Make all of this clear. But, of course, this isn’t foolproof meaning you could still be doing this and you could still find yourself in a contract interpretation dispute. Although, if you are doing this, and being proactive, the contract interpretation disputes should be minimal and more streamlined. In Liberty Technical Services, LLC v. Department of Veterans Affairs, CBCA 8385, 2026 WL 407656 (CBCA 2026), the dispute centered on whether the government owed the contractor for certain, necessary equipment (largely controllers, but also tanks and pumps) not specified in the contract. The government countered that this should be a non-issue because the contractor always acknowledged it was responsible for furnishing the unspecified, necessary equipment, and the contractor did actually provide the equipment without direction from the government. Each party claimed the contract was unambiguous when construed in context. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Pursuing Claims for Loss Caused by Recent Kona Low Storms for Homeowners and Businesses

    May 12, 2026 —
    The recent Kona Low storms that hit all islands were devastating, causing significant property damage. Homeowners and businesses will be seeking coverage under their insurance policies to recover for their losses. Here is a brief look at what may be covered and which exclusions may be troublesome in homeowners’ and commercial property policies. Typically, both a homeowners’ policy and a commercial property policy include a grant of coverage for “direct physical loss of or damage to Covered Property.” Covered perils are listed, including such events as fire, lightning, or windstorm. Covered Property includes dwellings, other structures on the property and personal property. Additional coverages are usually provided. This includes debris removal after a peril insured against or collapse of a structure. In a homeowners’ policy, additional living expenses are likely covered when the damaged home is not fit to live in. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Land Use Team Wins Appeal for Affordable Senior Housing Development in San Francisco

    February 23, 2026 —
    Sheppard successfully defended client Mitchelville Real Estate Group and its non-profit development partner Bernal Heights Housing Corporation in an appeal of a 70-unit, 100% affordable senior housing development at 3333 Mission Street in San Francisco’s Bernal Heights neighborhood. The team secured approval of the project, representing the developer on complex land use issues including split zoning, SB 35, the State Density Bonus Law, the Housing Crisis Act, tribal cultural resources and the Subdivision Map Act. Although the ministerially approved parcel map for the project utilized SB 35, it was appealed to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors and unanimously rejected. Sheppard’s real estate transactional team also assisted with the acquisition of the property. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sheppard