• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building expert witness Laurel Indiana office building expert witness Laurel Indiana housing expert witness Laurel Indiana parking structure expert witness Laurel Indiana retail construction expert witness Laurel Indiana institutional building expert witness Laurel Indiana production housing expert witness Laurel Indiana custom home expert witness Laurel Indiana structural steel construction expert witness Laurel Indiana landscaping construction expert witness Laurel Indiana condominium expert witness Laurel Indiana high-rise construction expert witness Laurel Indiana casino resort expert witness Laurel Indiana multi family housing expert witness Laurel Indiana tract home expert witness Laurel Indiana low-income housing expert witness Laurel Indiana Medical building expert witness Laurel Indiana condominiums expert witness Laurel Indiana mid-rise construction expert witness Laurel Indiana Subterranean parking expert witness Laurel Indiana hospital construction expert witness Laurel Indiana townhome construction expert witness Laurel Indiana
    Laurel Indiana window expert witnessLaurel Indiana construction expert witnessesLaurel Indiana delay claim expert witnessLaurel Indiana construction project management expert witnessesLaurel Indiana civil engineering expert witnessLaurel Indiana construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessLaurel Indiana expert witness structural engineer
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Expert Witness Engineer Builders Information
    Laurel, Indiana

    Indiana Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: According to SB45160, §IC 32-27-3-1&2 a claimant must provide written notice 60 days before filing an action. Within 21 days after service of the notice, the construction professional must serve a written response. Claimant must file list of known construction defects, description, and the construction professional responsible for each alleged defect (to the extent known).

    Expert Witness Engineer Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Laurel Indiana

    License required for plumbing. All other licensing is done at the local county level.

    Expert Witness Engineer Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Home Builders Association of Gtr Terre Haute
    Local # 1582
    2747 Sidenbender Rd
    Terre Haute, IN 47802

    Laurel Indiana Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Southeastern Indiana chapter
    Local # 1536
    394 W County Road 400 N
    Greensburg, IN 47240
    Laurel Indiana Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Madison County Chapter
    Local # 1504
    853 E. Southern Avenue
    Indianapolis, IN 46203
    Laurel Indiana Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Jackson-Jennings Builders Association
    Local # 1574
    11990 W Mt Healthy Rd
    Columbus, IN 47201

    Laurel Indiana Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Builders Association of Greater Indianapolis
    Local # 1544
    PO Box 44670
    Indianapolis, IN 46244

    Laurel Indiana Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Indiana Builders Association
    Local # 1500
    101 W Ohio St Ste 1111
    Indianapolis, IN 46204

    Laurel Indiana Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Wayne County Builders Association
    Local # 1570
    PO Box 1591
    Richmond, IN 47375

    Laurel Indiana Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Expert Witness Engineer News and Information
    For Laurel Indiana

    He's the Top U.S. Mortgage Salesman. His Daughter Isn't Buying It

    City Council Authorizes Settlement of Basement Flooding Cases

    Contract Not So Clear in South Carolina Construction Defect Case

    House Passes Bill to Delay EPA Ozone Rule

    Housing Agency Claims It Is Not a Party in Construction Defect Case

    Buyer's Demolishing of Insured's Home Not Barred by Faulty Construction Exclusion

    California Committee Hosts a Hearing on Deadly Berkeley Balcony Collapse

    Location, Location, Location—Even in Construction Liens

    BHA has a Nice Swing Donates to CDCCF

    Insurer’s Consent Not Needed for Settlement

    Legal Matters Escalate in Aspen Condo Case

    Oregon to Add 258,000 Jobs by 2022, State Data Shows

    Did the Court of Appeals Just Raise the Bar for California Contractors to Self-Report Construction-Related Judgments?

    Boston-area Asbestos-Abatement Firms Face Wage and Safety Complaints

    Landmark Towers Association, Inc. v. UMB Bank, N.A. or: One Bad Apple Spoils the Whole Bunch

    Insurer Obligated to Cover Preventative Remediation of Construction Defects

    Construction Halted in Wisconsin Due to Alleged Bid Issues

    Zombie Foreclosures Plaguing Various Cities in the U.S.

    The Greenest U.S. Cities & States

    Do Change Orders Need to be in Writing and Other Things That Might Surprise You

    No Coverage for Installation of Defective Steel Framing

    South Carolina Homeowners May Finally Get Class Action for Stucco Defects

    Who Says You Can’t Choose between Liquidated Damages or Actual Damages?

    Construction Defect Class Action Lawsuit Alleges National Cover-up of Pipe Defects

    Second Month of US Construction Spending Down

    Boston Nonprofit Wants to Put Grown-Ups in Dorms

    Managing Partner Jeff Dennis Recognized as One of the Most Influential Business People & Opinion Shapers in Orange County

    Tenth Circuit Finds Insurer Must Defend Unintentional Faulty Workmanship

    Defect Claims Called “Witch Hunt”

    Construction Costs Absorb Two Big Hits This Quarter

    Georgia Amends Anti-Indemnity Statute

    Official Tried to Influence Judge against Shortchanged Subcontractor

    U.S. Architecture Firms’ Billing Index Faster in Dec.

    Stuck in Seattle: The Aggravating Adventures of a Gigantic Tunnel Drill

    Bill Seeks to Protect Legitimate Contractors

    Ivanhoe Cambridge Plans Toronto Office Towers, Terminal

    This Times Square Makeover Is Not a Tourist Attraction

    Wichita Condo Association Files Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Private Project Payment Bonds and Pay if Paid in Virginia

    Professional Services Exclusion Bars Coverage Where Ordinary Negligence is Inseparably Intertwined With Professional Service

    California Supreme Court Finds that When it Comes to Intentional Interference Claims, Public Works Projects are Just Different, Special Even

    Nevada Assembly Bill Proposes Changes to Construction Defect Litigation

    Architect Plans to 3D-Print a Two-Story House

    The Brexit Effect on the Construction Industry

    Not So Universal Design Fails (guest post)

    Hovnanian Increases Construction Defect Reserves for 2012

    Homebuilding Continues to Recover in San Antonio Area

    Oregon Bridge Closed to Inspect for Defects

    NY Supreme Court Rules City Not Liable for Defective Sidewalk

    Court Agrees to Stay Coverage Matter While Underlying State Action is Pending
    Corporate Profile


    Leveraging from more than 5500 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Laurel, Indiana Expert Witness Engineer Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Laurel'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.

    Expert Witness Engineer News & Info
    Laurel, Indiana

    Construction Defects Claims Can Be Limited by Contract Says Washington Court

    February 11, 2013 —
    The firm Lane Powell has issued a construction law update on the recent Washington Supreme Court decision in Washington State Major League Baseball Public Facility District v. The Baseball Club of Seattle, LP. In the underlying construction defect claim, the Public Facility District found defects in the structural steel at Seattle’s Safeco Field. The contractor, Huber, Hunt & Nichols-Kiewit Construction Company claimed that construction claims could not be made, as it was barred by the statue of repose. Washington State has a six-year limitation on its statute of repose, however, the court noted that the contract contained a clause that, as noted by Lane Powell, “any alleged causes of action automatically accrue at substantial contemplation,” instead of within six years of substantial completion. The court concluded that the statue of repose could be rendered inoperative by contract. Further, the court found that these contract clauses pertained to subcontractors as well. Nevertheless, as PFD is a subdivision of the state, the court found that no statue of limitations could be appled. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Massachusetts Couple Seek to Recuse Judge in Construction Defect Case

    September 30, 2011 —

    After seeing their $1 million jury award overturned on appeal by a judge who called the award “against the weight of evidence and likely due to misapprehension, confusion or passion,” Kathryn and Christian Culley are seeking to have him removed from the case. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has rejected their claim.

    The Culleys claim that Judge Thomas R. Murtagh’s decision was influence by him membership in the Andover Country Club which is represented by the opposing counsel in their construction defect case. Justice Margot G. Botsford had denied the Culley’s request, ruling that they had other remedies available to them.

    The SJC noted in their ruling that if the Culleys are alleging judicial misconduct a request must be made to the Commission on Judicial Conduct. Their lawyer plans to file a new motion for recusal with the SJC.

    Read the full story…

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

    Coverage for Construction Defects Barred By Exclusion j (5)

    April 15, 2015 —
    The Texas Court Appeal reversed a trial court judgment which found coverage in favor of the contractor based upon exclusion j(5). Dallas Nat'l Ins. Co. v. Calitex Corp., 2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 2002 (Tex. Ct. App. March 3, 2015). Turnkey Residential Group, Inc., was the contractor to construct a twelve-unit townhome complex in Dallas. The owner of the project was Calitex Corporation. Construction began on November 2006. The project was to be completed by Turnkey by October 27, 2007. Calitex filed suit against Turnkey and some of its subcontractors in February 2008. Calitex alleged problems with Turnkey's work included: (1) the stone exterior was not properly treated and leaked, and some areas were left uncovered with stone; and (2) windows leaked. It was further alleged that the quality of materials, labor and craftsmanship did not meet the standards of the contract and resulted in damages. Turnkey submitted a notice of claim to its insurer, Dallas National Insurance Company (DNIC). Coverage was denied. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at

    Is Construction Defect Notice under Florida Repair Statute a Suit?

    September 03, 2015 —
    In Altman Contractors, Inc. v. Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co., “the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida addressed what constitutes a ‘suit’ within the context of Florida’s right-to-repair procedure for construction defect disputes,” according to Keith Moskowitz, Michael Barnes, J. Stephen Berry, and Cynthia Liu of Dentons. The district court “held that a notice under Chapter 558 of the Florida statutes, the ‘notice and repair’ statute, ‘does not constitute a “civil proceeding”’ and thus ‘is not a “suit”’ triggering an insurer’s duty to defend under Altman’s Crum & Forster commercial general liability (CGL) policies.” The article states that “[w]hether the 11th Circuit affirms the district court’s decision or not, its opinion will be important to insurers questioning when insurance coverage is triggered by an event other than a formal proceeding initiated in a court of law.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Defects Lead to Demolition

    May 26, 2011 —

    Ten years after it was built, demolition of Seattle’s McGuire Building has begun, as Jeanne Lang Jones reports in the Puget Sound Business Journal. Construction defects had rendered the 25-story apartment building uninhabitable. The major problem was corroded steel cabling. According to the report, “the building’s owners reached an undisclosed settlement last year with St. Louis-based contractor McCarthy Building Companies.”

    Read the full story…

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

    After Restoring Power in North Carolina, Contractor Faces Many Claims

    August 10, 2017 —
    Having successfully helped to restore power to two North Carolina barrier islands, PCL Civil Constructors now faces the fallout from a July 27 construction incident that forced a week-long evacuation of 60,000 visitors, putting a potential multimillion-dollar dent in the region’s tourism-dependent economy. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jim Parsons, ENR
    ENR may be contacted at

    Ambitious Building Plans in Boston

    November 18, 2011 —

    Although most are unlikely to change the Boston skyline, there are several large projects on the drawing boards. The site BostInnovation covered ten of them in a recent post. Downtown Boston will be the site of several of these large projects, including three towers to be added to the Christian Science Plaza, a 404-unit residential tower in the Theater District, and perhaps the largest of these projects, a 47-story tower to be built over Copley Plaza, which will tower over the adjacent buildings. None of the planned buildings will challenge the Hancock Tower’s 60 stories.

    Read the full story…

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

    A Look at Business and Professions Code Section 7031

    July 09, 2014 —
    Garret Murai, on his California Construction Law Blog, stated that California’s Business and Professions Code Section 7031 has often been described as draconian, harsh, and unjust—but still enforceable. The section does two things: first, it “prohibits unlicensed or improperly licensed contractors from suing to recover compensation for construction work requiring a license,” and second, it “permits property owners to sue such contractors for disgorgement of all compensation paid for such work.” According to Murai, the “strict enforcement of Section 7031” is thought to ensure “that contractors meet the minimum qualifications necessary for licensure.” Murai analyzed the case E. J. Franks Construction, Inc. v Sahota, which “carved out a limited exception to Section 7031 for contractors who form business entities and transfer their existing contractor’s license to such entities.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of