BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut industrial building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut condominium expert witness Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking expert witness Fairfield Connecticut casino resort expert witness Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut office building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut retail construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up expert witness Fairfield Connecticut tract home expert witness Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut parking structure expert witness Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut institutional building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut custom home expert witness Fairfield Connecticut Medical building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut custom homes expert witness Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expert
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Connecticut Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Case law precedent


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Fairfield Connecticut

    License required for electrical and plumbing trades. No state license for general contracting, however, must register with the State.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Home Builders & Remo Assn of Fairfield Co
    Local # 0780
    433 Meadow St
    Fairfield, CT 06824

    Fairfield Connecticut Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Builders Association of Eastern Connecticut
    Local # 0740
    20 Hartford Rd Suite 18
    Salem, CT 06420

    Fairfield Connecticut Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of New Haven Co
    Local # 0720
    2189 Silas Deane Highway
    Rocky Hill, CT 06067

    Fairfield Connecticut Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Hartford Cty Inc
    Local # 0755
    2189 Silas Deane Hwy
    Rocky Hill, CT 06067

    Fairfield Connecticut Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of NW Connecticut
    Local # 0710
    110 Brook St
    Torrington, CT 06790

    Fairfield Connecticut Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Connecticut (State)
    Local # 0700
    3 Regency Dr Ste 204
    Bloomfield, CT 06002

    Fairfield Connecticut Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Fairfield Connecticut


    Construction Law Firm Welin, O'Shaughnessy + Scheaf Merging with McDonald Hopkins LLC

    Spearin Doctrine 100 Years Old and Still Thriving in the Design-Build Delivery World

    Toll Brothers Snags Home Builder of the Year Honors at HLS

    Enerpac Plays Critical Role in Industry-changing Discovery for Long Span Bridges at The University of Nebraska-Lincoln

    More Construction Defects for San Francisco’s Eastern Bay Bridge Expansion

    Florida County Suspends Impact Fees to Spur Development

    Claims against Broker for Insufficient Coverage Fail

    Beverly Hills Voters Reject Plan for Enclave's Tallest Building

    Angela Cooner Named "Top Lawyer" by Phoenix Magazine in Inaugural Publication

    How Contractors Can Prevent Fraud in Their Workforce

    Ruling Closes the Loop on Restrictive Additional Insured Endorsement – Reasonable Expectations of Insured Builder Prevails Over Intent of Insurer

    New York Building Boom Spurs Corruption Probe After Death

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Tender Is the Fight”

    Safer Schools Rendered Unsafe Due to Construction Defects

    Only Two Weeks Until BHA’s Texas MCLE Seminar in San Antonio

    Lien Law Unlikely To Change — Yet

    Workers Compensation Insurance: Dangers of the Audit Process

    No Concrete Answers on Whether Construction Defects Are Occurrences

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s 2023 Mountain States Super Lawyers Rising Stars!

    California Supreme Court Holds Insured Entitled to Coverage Under CGL Policy for Negligent Hiring

    Jury Trials and Mediation in Philadelphia County: Virtually in Person

    To Catch a Thief

    Insurer Must Defend Contractor Against Claims of Faulty Workmanship

    Privity Problems Continue for Additional Insureds in the Second Circuit

    Negligence Claim Not Barred by Gist of the Action Doctrine

    Shifting the Risk of Delay by Having Float Go Your Way

    From Both Sides Now: Looking at Contracts Through a Post-Pandemic Lens

    A Landlord’s Guide to the Center for Disease Control’s Eviction Moratorium

    Ensuring Efficient Arbitration of Construction Disputes Involving Mechanic’s Liens

    Disputes Over Arbitrator Qualifications: The Northern District of California Offers Some Guidance

    Project Completion Determines Mechanics Lien Recording Deadline

    Settlement Reached on Troubled Harbor Bridge in Corpus Christi, Texas

    Fifth Circuit Decision on Number of Occurrences Underscores Need to Carefully Tailor Your Insurance Program

    Happenings in and around the 2016 West Coast Casualty Seminar

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

    Insurer Sued for Altering Policies after Claim

    Michael Baker Intl. Settles Federal Pay Bias Allegations

    No Coverage for Additional Insured

    Seyfarth Shaw’s Construction Group Receives Top Tier Recognition from Legal 500

    2023 Construction Outlook: Construction Starts Expected to Flatten

    Illinois Federal Court Determines if Damages Are Too Remote

    Don MacGregor of Bert L. Howe & Associates Awarded Silver Star Award at WCC Construction Defect Seminar

    Five Lewis Brisbois Attorneys Named “Top Rank Attorneys” by Nevada Business Magazine

    OSHA Issues COVID-19 Guidance for Construction Industry

    Consultant’s Corner: Why Should Construction Business Owners Care about Cyber Liability Insurance?

    Benford’s Law: A Seldom Used Weapon in Forensic Accounting

    Sinking Buildings on the Rise?

    Labor Shortage Confirmed Through AGC Poll

    Navigating Abandonment of a Construction Project

    Congress Considers Pandemic Risk Insurance Act to Address COVID-19 Business Interruptions Losses
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Construction Expert Witness Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield'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.

    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

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

    December 11, 2023 —
    The Privette doctrine, so-called because of a case of the same name, Privette v. Superior Court, 5 Cal.4th 698 (1993), provides a rebuttable presumption that a hirer is not liable for workplace injuries sustained by employees of hired parties. In other words, if a property owner hires a contractor, and one of the contractor’s employees gets injured while working on the property, there is a rebuttable presumption that the property owner is not liable for the employee’s injuries, the rationale being that because the contractor is required to carry workers’ compensation insurance the contractor is in the better position to absorb losses incurred a workplace injury. There are, however, two widely recognized exceptions to the Privette doctrine. The first, is the Hooker exception, again named after a case of the same name, Hooker v. Department of Transportation, 27 Cal.th 198 (2002), which provides that a hirer is liable for injuries to a hired parties’ employees, if the hirer retained control over the work being performed, negligently exercised that control, and the negative exercise of that control contributed to the employee’s injury. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Congratulations to Las Vegas Team on Their Successful Motion for Summary Judgment!

    May 06, 2024 —
    This case arose from an alleged trip and fall on an uneven surface in a parking lot outside of BWBO’s client’s restaurant. Plaintiff alleged more than $385,000 in past medical specials (with high potential for future care and treatment) with exposure in excess of $1,000,000.00. The Plaintiff named as Defendants BWBO’s client as well as several entities related to their landlord. Early in the case, Las Vegas Partner Jeffrey W. Saab and Senior Associate D. Ryan Efros moved for summary judgment based on terms of the restaurant’s lease. They argued that based on the lease, the duty to maintain the surface of the parking lot fell exclusively to the landlord, rather than the restaurant’s client. Plaintiff opposed the motion arguing that the prevailing case law held that any agreement between a tenant and its landlord does not preclude a plaintiff from asserting either or both defendants breached their duties of care. Jeff and Ryan distinguished that case and successfully persuaded the Court that there could be no contractual duty and no common law duty to maintain the parking surface, clearing the way for the court to grant summary judgment. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Finding an "Occurrence," Appellate Court Rules Insurer Must Defend

    March 11, 2024 —
    Reversing the trial court, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals found the insurer must defend a cross-claim against the insured owner of a building after an explosion occurred. LBC, LLC v Spectrum Brands, Inc., 2023 Wis. App. LEXIS 1251 (Wis. Ct. App, Nov. 30, 2023). LBC leased commercial property to Spectrum. Spectrum stored lithium on the property. The lithium exploded when it came into contact with water that entered the premises during historic flooding in August 2018. Spectrum remediated the premises, vacated the premises prior to the lease's termination date, and stopped paying rent. LBC sued Spectrum, alleging that Spectrum negligently stored the lithium and that Spectrum breached the lease. Spectrum counterclaimed, alleging that LCB breached the lease in various respects, that LCB negligent allowed water to infiltrate the premises, and that Spectrum was constructively evicted. LCB tendered the counterclaim to its insurer, General Casualty. The tender was denied and LCB sued. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Court of Appeals Confirms that King County Superior Court’s Jury Selection Process Satisfies Due Process Requirements

    December 04, 2023 —
    Raymond Budd developed mesothelioma after working with a drywall product called “joint compound” from 1962 to 1972. He sued Kaiser Gypsum Company, Inc. and others for damages, contending that the company’s joint compound caused his illness. A jury returned a verdict in Budd’s favor and awarded him nearly $13.5 million. Kaiser appealed, claiming (1) insufficient randomness in the jury-selection process, (2) erroneous transcription of expert testimony, (3) lack of proximate causation, (4) lack of medical causation, (5) an improper jury instruction on defective design, (6) improper exclusion of sexual battery and marital discord evidence, (7) improper admission of post-exposure evidence, (8) improper exclusion of regulatory provisions, and (9) a failure to link its product to Budd’s disease. The Court of Appeals, Division 1, affirmed the verdict in favor of Budd. Though all of the nine bases for error raised by Kaiser merit discussion, the jury-selection process issue is most probative here. Kaiser made three challenges against the jury selection process. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Joshua Lane, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Lane may be contacted at joshua.lane@acslawyers.com

    Meet the Forum's In-House Counsel: KATE GOLDEN

    February 19, 2024 —
    Company: Mortenson Email: kate.golden@mortenson.com Website: www.mortenson.com College: University of Iowa (Bachelor of Science in Engineering, 1991) Graduate School: University of Minnesota (Master of Science in Civil Engineering, 1994) Law School: William Mitchell College of Law (now Mitchell | Hamline School of Law) (JD 1999) States Where Company Operates/Does Business: Mortenson is a national builder and developer with 13 regional office locations. Q: Describe your background and the path you took to becoming in-house counsel. A: In high school, I loved math and science, so I attended the University of Iowa College of Engineering and studied civil engineering, with a focus on environmental engineering. To practice environmental engineering at that time, you generally needed a master’s degree, so I attended the University of Minnesota, where my thesis for my degree program was “Organochlorines in Lake Michigan.” I then worked as an environmental engineer for a consulting firm called Montgomery Watson (now MWH) assisting clients with various environmental issues from air permitting to watershed reports to risk assessments of contaminated sites. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jessica Knox, Stinson LLP
    Ms. Knox may be contacted at jessica.knox@stinson.com

    Blog Completes Sixteenth Year

    January 29, 2024 —
    Insurance Law Hawaii completes its sixteenth year this month. We began posting in December 2002, 1761 posts ago. The year 2023 has added 105 new posts. The goal is to keep readers in tune with new developments in insurance-related cases from Hawaii and across the country. This year included a big case handled successfully by our office regarding insurers attempt to gain reimbursement of defense costs for uncovered claims. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., et. al v. Bodell Construction Co., et. al, 2023 Haw. LEXIS 194 (Haw. Nov. 14, 2023). We will continue posting important coverage developments in the next year. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    What a Difference a Day Makes: Mississippi’s Discovery Rule

    November 16, 2023 —
    The discovery rule applies to latent injuries, such that the statute of limitations does not begin to run until the plaintiff knows of or should have known of the injury. In Western World Ins. Group v. KC Welding, LLC, No. 2022-CA-00527-SCT, 2023 Miss. LEXIS 278 (KC Welding), a majority of the justices on the Supreme Court of Mississippi (Supreme Court) affirmed the trial court’s ruling that Western World Insurance Group (Insurer) filed its lawsuit one day late. Thus, the statute of limitations barred Insurer’s lawsuit. In KC Welding, on July 12, 2018, KC Welding, LLC (KC Welding) sent an employee to Sunbelt Shavings, LLC (Sunbelt) to repair the door of a box containing wood chips. Sunbelt’s employees discovered that KC Welding employees were welding a storage bin that had not been emptied of wood chips and Sunbelt’s employees asked KC Welding’s employees to leave. After that, Sunbelt’s employees attempted to soak the area with water. Later than night, a fire started on Sunbelt’s property, apparently as the result of smoldering wood shavings, a fire that was extinguished on July 13, 2018. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Doerler, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Doerler may be contacted at doerlerw@whiteandwilliams.com

    Catching Killer Clauses in Contract Negotiations

    January 29, 2024 —
    Risk-management personnel who are in the business of reviewing and negotiating construction contracts have some simple tools at their disposal to make sure their edits are addressing all of the killer risk-shifting clauses in those contracts. One of those is the index to that document. But not all authors of construction contract documents are kind enough to include an exhaustive index in their form agreements. One of the most popular sets of general conditions, the A201 General Conditions published by the American Institute of Architects, includes one that is fairly comprehensive. It identifies the six terms that include a reference to indemnification, for example. On the other end of the spectrum are the innumerable custom forms created by public and private project owners, and these rarely have an index. Even more powerful than an index is the search or find functions that are available in word processing applications and now in Adobe, the publisher of documents in portable document format, more commonly known as PDF. But with PDF documents, one must be careful to make sure the document under review is in fact searchable. Because every letter counts, it is important to have full confidence in the integrity of the search. Reprinted courtesy of James T. Dixon, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...