• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    concrete tilt-up expert witness Hoisington Kansas structural steel construction expert witness Hoisington Kansas tract home expert witness Hoisington Kansas custom homes expert witness Hoisington Kansas office building expert witness Hoisington Kansas casino resort expert witness Hoisington Kansas high-rise construction expert witness Hoisington Kansas industrial building expert witness Hoisington Kansas condominiums expert witness Hoisington Kansas retail construction expert witness Hoisington Kansas low-income housing expert witness Hoisington Kansas parking structure expert witness Hoisington Kansas mid-rise construction expert witness Hoisington Kansas institutional building expert witness Hoisington Kansas multi family housing expert witness Hoisington Kansas hospital construction expert witness Hoisington Kansas housing expert witness Hoisington Kansas production housing expert witness Hoisington Kansas Medical building expert witness Hoisington Kansas Subterranean parking expert witness Hoisington Kansas condominium expert witness Hoisington Kansas custom home expert witness Hoisington Kansas
    Hoisington Kansas window expert witnessHoisington Kansas contractor expert witnessHoisington Kansas construction project management expert witnessesHoisington Kansas expert witness concrete failureHoisington Kansas fenestration expert witnessHoisington Kansas construction expert testimonyHoisington Kansas consulting engineers
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Expert Witness Engineer Builders Information
    Hoisington, Kansas

    Kansas Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: HB 2294 requires a claimant to serve a written notice of claim upon the contractor prior to filing a lawsuit. The law places deadlines on the contractor to serve notice on each subcontractor (15 days) and provide a written response to the claimant (30 days). It permits the claimant to file a lawsuit without further notice if the contractor disputes the claim, does not respond to the notice, does not complete work on the defect on a timely basis or does not make a payment in the time allowed.

    Expert Witness Engineer Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Hoisington Kansas

    No state license for general contracting. All businesses must register with the Department of Revenue.

    Expert Witness Engineer Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    McPherson Area Contractors Association
    Local # 1735
    PO Box 38
    McPherson, KS 67460
    Hoisington Kansas Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Salina
    Local # 1750
    2125 Crawford Place
    Salina, KS 67401

    Hoisington Kansas Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Lawrence Home Builders Association
    Local # 1723
    PO Box 3490
    Lawrence, KS 66046

    Hoisington Kansas Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Topeka Home Builders Association
    Local # 1765
    1505 SW Fairlawn Rd
    Topeka, KS 66604

    Hoisington Kansas Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Kansas Home Builders Association
    Local # 1700
    212 SW 8th Ave Ste 201
    Topeka, KS 66603

    Hoisington Kansas Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Hutchinson
    Local # 1720
    PO Box 2209
    Hutchinson, KS 67504

    Hoisington Kansas Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Flint Hills Area Builders Association
    Local # 1726
    2601 Anderson Ave Ste 207
    Manhattan, KS 66502

    Hoisington Kansas Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Expert Witness Engineer News and Information
    For Hoisington Kansas

    40 Year Anniversary – Congratulations Ed Doernberger

    California Supreme Court Allows Claim Under Unfair Competition Statute To Proceed

    Construction Law Breaking News: California Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Beacon Residential Community Association

    Insurer Must Defend Where Possible Continuing Property Damage Occurred

    Cuomo Proposes $1.7 Billion Property-Tax Break for New York

    Protect Against Design Errors With Owners Protective Professional Indemnity Coverage

    Demand for New Homes Good News for Home Builders

    Structural Problems May Cause Year-Long Delay Opening New Orleans School

    CGL Insurer’s Duty to Defend Insured During Pre-Suit 558 Process: Maybe?

    Bert L. Howe & Associates Celebrates 21-Year Success Story

    These Pioneers Are Already Living the Green Recovery

    Charlotte, NC Homebuilder Accused of Bilking Money from Buyers

    Washington State Updates the Contractor Registration Statute

    Providing “Labor” Under the Miller Act

    Kentucky Court Upholds Arbitration Award, Denies Appeal

    Policyholder Fails to Build Adequate Record to Support Bad Faith Claim

    The Firm Hits the 9 Year Mark!

    2018 California Construction Law Update

    Neighbor Allowed to Remove Tree Roots on Her Property That Supported Adjoining Landowners’ Two Large Trees With Legal Immunity

    A Behind-the-Scenes Look at Substitution Hearings Under California’s Listing Law

    Subcontractors Found Liable to Reimburse Insurer Defense Costs in Equitable Subrogation Action

    Between Scylla and Charybids: The Mediation Privilege and Legal Malpractice Claims

    Court Rules in Favor of Treasure Island Developers in Environmental Case

    Californians Swarm Few Listings Cuts to Affordable Homes

    Floating Crane on Job in NYC's East River Has a Storied Past of Cold War Intrigue

    Construction Defect Lawsuit May Affect Home Financing

    Where There's Smoke...California's New Emergency Wildfire Smoke Protection Regulation And What Employers Are Required To Do

    Foreclosure Deficiency: Construction Loan vs. Home Improvement Loan

    Chinese Millionaire Roils Brokers Over Shrinking Mansion

    Colorado Supreme Court to Hear Colorado Pool Systems, Inc. v. Scottsdale Insurance Company, et al.

    Homebuilding Held Back by Lack of Skilled Workers

    Southern California Lost $8 Billion in Construction Wages

    Are Construction Defect Laws Inhibiting the Development of Attached Ownership Housing in Colorado?

    Statutory Time Limits for Construction Defects in Massachusetts

    The Best Lawyers in America© Peer Review Names Eight Newmeyer & Dillion Partners in Multiple Categories and Two Partners as Orange County’s Lawyers of the Year in Construction and Insurance Law

    Dusseldorf Evacuates About 4,000 as World War II Bomb Defused

    Construction Defect Suit Can Continue Against Plumber

    Client Alert: Service Via Tag Jurisdiction Insufficient to Subject Corporation to General Personal Jurisdiction

    Supreme Court of Canada Broadly Interprets Exception to Faulty Workmanship Exclusion

    Fifth Circuit: Primary Insurer Relieved of Duty to Defend Without Release of Liability of Insured

    Mid-Session Overview of Colorado’s 2017 Construction Defect Legislation

    Four Common Construction Contracts

    Does a No-Damage-for-Delay Clause Also Preclude Acceleration Damages?

    The Biggest Change to the Mechanics Lien Law Since 1963

    General Contractors Must Plan to Limit Liability for Subcontractor Injury

    Gut Feeling Does Not Disqualify Expert Opinion

    Wildfire Is Efficient Proximate Cause of Moisture Reaching Expansive Soils Under Residence

    Making the Construction Dispute Resolution Process More Efficient and Less Expensive, Part 2

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

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected to the 2020 Southern California Super Lawyers List
    Corporate Profile


    The Hoisington, Kansas Expert Witness Engineer 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 Hoisington'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.

    Expert Witness Engineer News & Info
    Hoisington, Kansas

    Contractor Prevailing Against Subcontractor On Common Law Indemnity Claim

    June 29, 2020 —
    Common law indemnity is not an easy claim to prove as the one seeking common law indemnity MUST be without fault: Indemnity is a right which inures to one who discharges a duty owed by him, but which, as between himself and another, should have been discharged by the other and is allowable only where the whole fault is in the one against whom indemnity is sought. It shifts the entire loss from one who, although without active negligence or fault, has been obligated to pay, because of some vicarious, constructive, derivative, or technical liability, to another who should bear the costs because it was the latter’s wrongdoing for which the former is held liable. Brother’s Painting & Pressure Cleaning Corp. v. Curry-Dixon Construction, LLC, 45 Fla. L. Weekly D259b (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) quoting Houdaille Industries, Inc. v. Edwards, 374 So.2d 490, 492-93 (Fla. 1979). Not only must the one seeking common law indemnity be without fault, but there also needs to be a special relationship between the parties (indemnitee and common law indemnitor) for common law indemnification to exist. Brother’s Painting & Pressure Cleaning Corp., supra (citation omitted). A special relationship has been found to exist between a general contractor and its subcontractors. Id. at n.2. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at

    Some Insurers Dismissed, Others Are Not in Claims for Faulty Workmanship

    February 18, 2020 —
    The insured Developer survived a motion to dismiss by one of several carriers who were asked to defend against claims for faulty workmanship. East 111 Assoc. LLC v. RLI Ins. Co., 2019 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 5331 (Oct. 4, 2019). Developers sponsored a residential condominium project and sold all units. The owners subsequently sought damages for $881,450 for alleged design and construction defects, and asserting causes of action for, among other things, breach of contract, specific performance and negligence. The underlying action settled for $350,000. Developers sought coverage from its insurers. The Developers sued the carriers for a declaratory judgment that they were entitled to a defense. Developers had a CGL policy issued by Mt. Hawley. Developers were also additional insureds in policies issued to subcontractors by James River, Admiral and Selective. The insurers moved to dismiss. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at

    Understand and Define Key Substantive Contract Provisions

    March 23, 2020 —
    The following contract provisions should be clearly understood before undertaking any construction project commences. Force Majeure Often referred to as an “Act of God,” a force majeure is an event, typically beyond the parties’ control, that prevents performance under a contract. To determine if a contractor need a force majeure clause in its contract, it should ask whether there may be instances where events beyond the contractor’s control could impact its contractual performance? If so, it will want this clause. Courts currently treat force majeure as an issue of contractual interpretation, focusing on the express language in the contract. Consequently, the scope and applicability of a force majeure clause depends on the contract’s terms. Using broad language in a force majeure clause may help protect against unforeseen events. But to the extent possible, parties should describe with particularity the circumstances intended to constitute a force majeure. The law relating to force majeure also fairly consistently provides that parties cannot avoid contractual obligations because performance has become economically burdensome. Courts have refused to apply force majeure clauses where an event only affects profitability. Recent attempts to categorize tariffs on construction materials as a force majeure have failed. Unless a tariff or tax is specifically listed as a force majeure event, it is unlikely to constitute a force majeure because it only affects profitability. Reprinted courtesy of Phillip L. Sampson Jr. & Richard F. Whiteley, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    When Coronavirus Cases Spike at Construction Jobsites

    July 27, 2020 —
    When Covid-19 took hold in several US states in early spring, Choate Construction responded, as many contractors did, by quickly adopting federal workplace safety guidelines for disinfecting surfaces and maintaining social distancing. Enhanced by various state lockdown measures for businesses and the general public, the new safety system seemed to work with only a handful of workers on Choate’s projects testing positive. Reprinted courtesy of Engineering News-Record reporters Richard Korman, Scott Judy and Jeff Rubenstone Mr. Korman may be contacted at Mr. Judy may be contacted at Mr. Rubenstone may be contacted at Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    You Cannot Arbitrate Claims Not Covered By The Arbitration Agreement

    March 16, 2020 —
    Regardless of the type of contract you are dealing with, “[a]rbitration provisions are contractual in nature, and therefore, construction of such provisions and the contracts in which they appear is a matter of contract interpretation.” Wiener v. Taylor Morrison Services, Inc., 44 Fla. L. Weekly D3012f (Fla. 1st DCA 2019). This means if you want to preserve your right to arbitrate claims you want to make sure your contract unambiguously expresses this right. Taking this one step further, if you want to make sure an arbitrator, and not the court, determines whether the claim is arbitrable if a dispute arises, you want to make sure that right is expressly contained in the arbitration provision. For example, in Wiener, a homeowner sued a home-builder for violation of the building code – a fairly common claim in a construction defect action. The homeowner’s claim dealt with a violation of building code as to exterior stucco deficiencies. The home-builder moved to compel the lawsuit to arbitration based on a structural warranty it provided to the homeowner that contained an arbitration provision. The structural warranty, however, was limited and did not apply to non-load-bearing elements which, per the warranty, were not deemed to have the potential for a major structural defect (e.g., a structural defect to load-bearing elements that would cause the home to be unsafe or inhabitable). The trial court compelled the dispute to arbitration pursuant to the arbitration provision in the structural warranty. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at

    "Your Work" Exclusion Bars Coverage

    July 06, 2020 —
    Although the appellate court agreed there was property damage caused by an occurrence, the "your work" exclusion barred the insured contractor's claim. King's Cove Marina, LLC v. Lambert Commercial Construction. LLC, 2019 Minn. App. LEXIS 389 (Minn. Ct. App. Dec. 16, 2019). King's Cover Marina sought to expand and remodel its main building. The marina hired Lambert to perform the remodeling project. Lambert hired Roehl Construction, Inc. as a subcontractor to install new concrete footings on the main level of the building and to provide concrete for the second-level mezzanine floor. After completion, the marina sued Lambert for breach of contract and negligence. The marina alleged that the concrete floors on the first and second levels were not constructed in accordance with industry standards or with project plans and specifications, resulting in excessive movement and cracking of the new concrete floors. Lambert tendered its defense to its insurer, United Fire & Casualty Company. United Fire defended under a reservation of rights and later sued Lambert for declaratory judgment. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at

    Priority of Liability Insurance Coverage and Horizontal and Vertical Exhaustion

    June 22, 2020 —
    Recently, I participated in a webinar involving the horizontal and vertical exhaustion of insurance coverage. Say what? This pertains to the PRIORITY of liability insurance coverage and the interface between a general contractor’s (or upstream party’s) primary insurance and the subcontractor’s (or downstream party’s) excess insurance, particularly when the general contractor is required to be indemnified by the subcontractor and named as an additional insured under the subcontractor’s liability policies. For instance, let’s assume the general contractor has a $2M primary policy and a $5M excess policy. Its subcontractor has a $1M primary and a $5M excess policy. The general contractor is an additional insured under the subcontractor’s policies and the subcontractor is required to contractually indemnify the general contractor. An issue occurs caused by the subcontractor’s negligence resulting in a $5M judgment against the general contractor and the subcontractor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at

    Your Bad Faith Jury Instruction Against an Insurer is Important

    March 09, 2020 —
    A statutory bad faith claim against an insurer is derived from Florida Statute s. 624.155. A bad faith claim against a first party insurer, such as a property insurer, must be statutory. Check out the hyperlink of the statute, but a party must first file a Civil Remedy Notice identifying the statutory violations to preserve the statutory bad faith claim giving the insurer an opportunity to cure. In a noteworthy case, Cooper v. Federated National Insurance Company, 44 Fla. L. Weekly D2961a (Fla. 5th DCA 2019), the Fifth District Court of Appeal dealt with the jury instruction for an insured’s statutory bad faith claim against their property insurer. The insured filed a bad faith claim predicated on the property insurer violating the provisions of Florida Statute s. 626.9541(1)(i)3, which involves unfair claim settlement practices. The insured had a jury trial and submitted a proposed jury instruction regarding bad faith that tracked the very essence of their bad faith claim and was modeled after s. 626.9541(1)(i)(3). The trial court, however, denied this jury instruction, instead adopting a standard jury instruction for bad faith. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the property insurer and the insured appealed arguing it was reversible error for the trial court NOT to present to the jury their bad faith jury instruction. The Fifth District agreed and ordered a new trial finding that the trial court’s failure to present the jury instruction amounted to a miscarriage of justice. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at