• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction expert witness La Crosse Kansas condominiums expert witness La Crosse Kansas concrete tilt-up expert witness La Crosse Kansas custom homes expert witness La Crosse Kansas condominium expert witness La Crosse Kansas mid-rise construction expert witness La Crosse Kansas custom home expert witness La Crosse Kansas institutional building expert witness La Crosse Kansas housing expert witness La Crosse Kansas Subterranean parking expert witness La Crosse Kansas parking structure expert witness La Crosse Kansas casino resort expert witness La Crosse Kansas production housing expert witness La Crosse Kansas Medical building expert witness La Crosse Kansas landscaping construction expert witness La Crosse Kansas low-income housing expert witness La Crosse Kansas structural steel construction expert witness La Crosse Kansas hospital construction expert witness La Crosse Kansas tract home expert witness La Crosse Kansas multi family housing expert witness La Crosse Kansas high-rise construction expert witness La Crosse Kansas industrial building expert witness La Crosse Kansas
    La Crosse Kansas window expert witnessLa Crosse Kansas construction expert testimonyLa Crosse Kansas construction project management expert witnessesLa Crosse Kansas engineering consultantLa Crosse Kansas structural engineering expert witnessesLa Crosse Kansas testifying construction expert witnessLa Crosse Kansas contractor expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Expert Witness Engineer Builders Information
    La Crosse, 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 La Crosse 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
    La Crosse Kansas Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

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

    La Crosse Kansas Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

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

    La Crosse Kansas Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

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

    La Crosse Kansas Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

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

    La Crosse Kansas Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

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

    La Crosse Kansas Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

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

    La Crosse Kansas Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Expert Witness Engineer News and Information
    For La Crosse Kansas

    Savannah Homeowners Win Sizable Judgment in Mold Case against HVAC Contractor

    White and Williams Announces Lawyer Promotions

    Vacant Property and the Right of Redemption in Pennsylvania

    Domtar Update

    Coronavirus and Contract Obligations

    Lawsuits over Roof Dropped

    New Stormwater Climate Change Tool

    Court Rejects Insurer's Argument That Two Triggers Required

    Do You Really Want Mandatory Arbitration in Your Construction Contract?

    Manhattan Townhouse Sells for a Record $79.5 Million

    Patent or Latent: An Important Question in Construction Defects

    Condo Owners Allege Construction Defects

    Facts about Chinese Drywall in Construction

    Insured Versus Insured Clause Does Not Bar Coverage

    The Families First Coronavirus Response Act: What Every Employer Should Know

    Contractor to Repair Defective Stucco, Plans on Suing Subcontractor

    County Elects Not to Sue Over Construction Defect Claims

    Disjointed Proof of Loss Sufficient

    The Fair Share Act Impacts the Strategic Planning of a Jury Trial

    An Interesting Look at Mechanic’s Lien Priority and Necessary Parties

    Online Meetings & Privacy in Today’s WFH Environment

    Southern California Super Lawyers Recognizes Four Snell & Wilmer Attorneys As Rising Stars

    New York Appellate Court Expands Policyholders’ Ability to Plead and Seek Consequential Damages

    BWB&O Expands to North San Diego

    No Coverage for Additional Insured After Completion of Operations

    A Homeowner’s Subsequent Action is Barred as a Matter of Law by way of a Prior “Right to Repair Act” Claim Resolved by Cash Settlement for Waiver of all Known or Unknown Claims

    “If It Walks Like A Duck . . .” – Expert Testimony Not Always Required In Realtor Malpractice Cases Where Alleged Breach Of Duty Can Be Easily Understood By Lay Persons

    Colorado Court of Appeals holds that insurance companies owe duty of prompt and effective communication to claimants and repair subcontractors

    Housing Inventory Might be Distorted by Pocket Listings

    Endorsement Excludes Replacement of Undamaged Property with Matching Materials

    A Primer on Suspension and Debarment for Federal Construction Projects

    No Coverage for Property Damage That is Limited to Work Completed by Subcontractor

    California Supreme Court McMillin Ruling

    OSHA’s New Severe Injury and Fatality Reporting Requirements, Are You Ready?

    Strict Liability or Negligence? The Proper Legal Standard for Inverse Condemnation caused by Water Damage to Property

    Avoiding 'E-trouble' in Construction Litigation

    Is Solar the Next Focus of Construction Defect Suits?

    The Housing Market Is Softening, But Home Depot and Lowe's Are Crushing It

    Benefits and Pitfalls of Partnerships Between Companies

    Court Again Defines Extent of Contractor’s Insurance Coverage

    Axa Unveils Plans to Transform ‘Stump’ Into London Skyscraper

    Mediation in the Zero Sum World of Construction

    "Is the Defective Work Covered by Insurance?"

    Retainage on Pennsylvania Public Contracts

    CGL Policies and the Professional Liabilities Exclusion

    Washington State May Allow Common Negligence Claims against Construction Professionals

    ETF Bulls Bet Spring Will Thaw the U.S. Housing Market

    Designers “Airpocalyspe” Creations

    California Court of Appeals Says, “We Like Eich(leay)!”

    In Supreme Court Showdown, California Appeals Courts Choose Sides Regarding Whether Right to Repair Act is Exclusive Remedy for Homeowners
    Corporate Profile


    The La Crosse, 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 La Crosse'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
    La Crosse, Kansas

    Be Careful with Good Faith Payments

    February 24, 2020 —
    Sometimes doing the expedient thing and what looks good at the time can come back to bite you. Just ask 3M Company. In Faneuil, Inc. v. 3M Co., the Virginia Supreme Court considered a customer services subcontract between Faneuil and 3M relating to a toll collection contract 3M entered into with ERC. The subcontract had a “pay if paid” clause in it requiring payment to 3M from ERC before ERC was required to pay Faneuil, a written change order provision and a base monthly payment to Faneuil for the services that could be reduced in the event of less than expected toll collections. Further, the subcontract stated that if either party settled 3rd party claims, that settlement would not bind the other party to the subcontract absent consent or Court order. Faneuil was then alleged to have been required to provide “Special Services” relating to manual identification of license plates and other information necessary for toll billing due to 3M’s alleged failure to provide adequate imaging services. Faneuil requested (without written change order) and 3M promised to pay extra for these services. When 3M was slow to pay for the special services, Faneuil did what you would expect and threatened to stop providing them. Instead of contesting the right to the work, 3m made sporadic “good faith” payments to induce continued Special Services from Faneuil. Eventually 3M’s issues caused ERC to stop payments and thus 3M stopped paying Faneuil. 3M then settled the payment claims with ERC and still failed to pay Faneuil. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at

    The 2019 ISO Forms: Additions, Revisions, and Pitfalls

    February 24, 2020 —
    The Insurance Services Office, Inc. (ISO) issued several new and revised endorsements for use with Commercial General Liability (CGL) coverage forms, which became effective December 1, 2019, in most jurisdictions. The new ISO endorsements include several notable changes that Policyholders should be aware of, including revisions to existing Additional Insured (AI), Primary and Noncontributory, and Waiver of Subrogation endorsements, as well as a number of new AI and other endorsement forms. A summary of the more significant elements of new ISO endorsements is provided below. NEW ISO FORMS
    • New AI Endorsements - Automatic Status for Completed Operations
    For Contractors, Owners and other construction industry stakeholders, there are two new AI endorsements of note, CG 20 39 12 19 – Additional Insured – Owners, Lessee or Contractors – Automatic Status when Required in Written Construction Agreement with You (Completed Operations) and CG 20 40 12 19 – Additional Insured – Owners Lessees or Contractors – Automatic Status for Other Parties when Required in Written Construction Agreement (Completed Operations). AI coverage for Completed Operations is generally provided under form CG 20 37, which requires each additional insured to be listed in the endorsement schedule. The new ISO endorsements automatically extend AI status for Completed Operations without having to specifically identify each additional insured, thereby mirroring current AI endorsements that confer automatic AI status for Ongoing Operations (e.g. CG 20 33 and CG 20 38). Thus, the CG 20 39 and CG 20 40, correspond with CG 20 33 (ongoing operations), and CG 20 38 (ongoing operations), respectively, to extend AI coverage for Completed Operations. Reprinted courtesy of Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. attorneys Richard Brown, Michael V. Pepe and Janie Reilly Eddy Mr. Brown may be contacted at Mr. Pepe may be contacted at Ms. Eddy may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Families First Coronavirus Response Act: What Every Employer Should Know

    April 06, 2020 —
    Smith Currie provides this update regarding the Families First Coronavirus Response Act as part of its continuing effort to monitor developments concerning the Coronavirus disease (“COVID-19”) and provide guidance as to potential issues that may arise in businesses across the United States. On March 18, 2020, President Trump signed into law the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (the “Act”), which contains provisions requiring certain private employers to provide paid leave to employees who cannot work because of Coronavirus, expanding Family and Medical Leave Act coverage, providing for federal tax credits to affected employers, and providing eligible states the ability to further fund their unemployment trust fund accounts. The Act is effective as of April 2, 2020 and will remain in place through December 31, 2020. Below, we provide a summary of the Act and several of its key components, including the Emergency Family and Medical Leave Expansion Act (“EFMLEA”), the Emergency Paid Sick Leave Act, and the Emergency Unemployment Insurance Stabilization and Access Act. Reprinted courtesy of Smith Currie attorneys Donald A. Velez, Karissa L. Fox and Sarah K. Carpenter Mr. Velez may be contacted at Ms. Fox may be contacted at Ms. Carpenter may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Just When You Thought the Green Building Risk Discussion Was Over. . .

    May 25, 2020 —
    As a reader of Construction Law Musings, you no doubt realize that I am a big proponent of “green” or sustainable building. I have also been known to sound a bit like Eeyore when discussing the charge into the breach of green building without considering the potential risks. Thankfully, and despite some of the risk predictions made here (and elsewhere for that matter) there have not been but so many major court cases relating to these risks. However, as a recent article in ENR Magazine warns, this lack of litigation does not mean that you should let your guard down. Just because the economy, warnings by attorneys and others, and possible lack of financial incentive to sue have kept the litigation numbers down does not mean that the risks have gone away. LEED requirements, time horizons and other risks that have become evident during the process of vetting green building contracts and practices still must be dealt with in contracts and insurance policies. These risks are well laid out in the ENR article and in other places here at Musings so I won’t outline them in detail here. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at

    Construction May Begin with Documents, but It Shouldn’t End That Way

    March 02, 2020 —
    For this week’s Guest Post Friday here at Musings, we welcome back Rob Mathewson. In his role as CEO, Rob handles strategy and partnerships for Geedra in addition to overseeing technology architecture and implementation. He has spent twenty years in sales and marketing management roles with experience in industrial, consumer and construction markets. Rob believes the construction industry is ripe for innovation, based on its massive size, yet low productivity. Even with such inefficiencies, a building still rises from the ground. Rob’s goal with Geedra is to leverage technology to increase transparency and communication so that projects can be completed with less risk, effort and cost. Prior to founding Geedra, Rob was the Chief Marketing Officer for Construction Documentation Services, where he was responsible for sales, marketing and business development. He spent 15 years in the chemical distribution business, including eleven years as the Northwest Branch Manager of a $50 million distributor. Rob was the founder and CEO for On The Spot Games, a board game startup. He is currently in the midst of a streak of over 2,900 consecutive days without a bad hair day. An avid mentor himself, his own business inspirations come from problem solvers like Dean Kamon, innovative communicators like Seth Godin, fierce competitors like Lance Armstrong and global gurus like Thomas Friedman. When he’s not creating innovations in the construction industry, his passions include bike riding, throwing the ball around with his kids, and cooking. He is an accomplished public speaker and is a past president of Emerald City Toastmasters. Rob holds a B.S. in Manufacturing Engineering from Boston University and a MBA from Seattle University. Construction folks are a focused bunch. Once a contractor signs a deal for a project, its team will immediately get to work generating and then executing a construction document set. For the entire duration of the schedule to follow, the construction team eats, sleeps and dreams about those documents. Their monomaniacal efforts continue until a building rises up from a patch of dirt in a matter of months. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at

    New California Construction Laws for 2020

    March 09, 2020 —
    The California Legislature introduced more than 3,033 bills in the first half of the 2019-2020 session. This article summarizes some of the more important bills affecting contractors in their roles as contractors, effective January 1, 2020, unless otherwise noted. Not addressed here are many other bills that will affect contractors in their roles as businesses, taxpayers, and employers. Each of the summaries is brief, focusing on what is most important to contractors. Because not all aspects of these bills are discussed, each summary’s title is a live link to the full text of the referenced bills for those wanting to explore the details of the new laws. BIDDING & PREQUALIFICATIONS Disabled Veteran Preferences Strengthened (AB 230, Brough) The California Legislature intends that every state procurement authority meet or exceed a DVBE participation goal of a minimum of 3% of total contract value. State departments must require prime contractors to certify at the completion of each contract the amount each DVBE received from the prime contractor, among other information. This new law requires the prime contractor to provide upon request proof of the amount and percentage of work the prime contractor committed to provide to one or more DVBEs under the contract in addition to proof of payment for work done by the DVBE. Additionally, prime contractors must now obtain permission before they may replace a listed DVBE. County of San Joaquin Now Authorized to Establish Bid Preferences (AB 1533, Eggman) This new law extends to the County of San Joaquin existing law that authorizes local agencies to establish preferences for small businesses, disabled veteran businesses, and social enterprises in facilitating contract awards. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Smith Currie

    The Pandemic of Litigation Sure to Follow the Coronavirus

    March 30, 2020 —
    As the Coronavirus crisis persists, America’s richly diverse private business sector finds itself increasingly subject to unprecedented governmental orders and restrictions that were unheard of only a few weeks ago. While the various “shutdown,” “shelter in place,” and “non-essential business” orders all aim to protect the public health, there is no doubt that the wave of litigation to follow is already swelling. Business interruption, civil authority, and cyber insurance coverages have already been widely discussed as issues certain to be litigated over the coming months and beyond. Additionally, breach of contract litigation is likely to spike as parties attempt to recoup their losses from canceled events, unfulfilled purchase commitments and other unmet obligations. Moreover, regional and national businesses are now in the difficult position of managing their respective affairs to comply with a patchwork of executive orders that are inconsistent from state to state. And, as the pandemic wears on, many are questioning the authority under which some of these executive orders and emergency regulations are being issued in the first place. Indeed, constitutional challenges are almost certain to follow as the business community reframes the characterization of their losses into notions of unconstitutional takings of private property and governmental impairment of private contract rights. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aaron Lovaas, Newmeyer Dillion
    Mr. Lovaas may be contacted at

    Illinois Insureds are Contesting One Carrier's Universal Denial to Covid-19 Losses

    May 11, 2020 —
    In response to the large number of COVID-19-related losses that businesses are experiencing, insurers have begun issuing statements informing their insureds of whether their policies will respond to the losses, and if so, what coverage will be afforded. Insurers cannot take a “one-size-fits-all” approach to the COVID-19 losses because, besides factual differences, the losses are occurring within all fifty states which means 50 different state law interpretations will apply. Recently, on March 27, 2020, a number of restaurants and movie theaters located in and around Chicago (the “Insureds”) filed a declaratory judgement action, titled Big Onion Tavern Group, LLC et al. v. Society Insurance, Inc., against their property insurance carrier, Society Insurance, Inc. (“Society”), seeking coverage for business interruption resulting from the shutdown order issued by the governor of Illinois. The suit alleges that Society improperly denied their business interruption claims by using a boiler plate denial. The denial issued by Society is allegedly used for all COVID-19 losses regardless of the applicable jurisdiction’s interpretation of the policy language and the specific coverage purchased by the insured. Further, in its denial, Society takes the position that any loss related to a government-issued closure order is uncovered, even though the Insureds specifically purchased business interruption coverage and their policies did not contain an exclusion for losses caused by viruses. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anna M. Perry, Saxe Doernberger & Vita
    Ms. Perry may be contacted at