BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut retail construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut custom homes expert witness Fairfield Connecticut tract home expert witness Fairfield Connecticut industrial building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut custom home expert witness Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking expert witness Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut parking structure expert witness Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up expert witness Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut condominiums expert witness Fairfield Connecticut office building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut condominium expert witness Fairfield Connecticut casino resort expert witness Fairfield Connecticut institutional building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witness
    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


    It’s a Bird, It’s a Plane . . . No, It’s a Drone. Long Awaited FAA Drone Regulations Finally Take Flight

    Firm Offers Tips on Construction Defects in Colorado

    Additional Insured Obligations and the Underlying Lawsuit

    Unjust Enrichment and Express Contract Don’t Mix

    Pennsylvania Modernizes State Building Code

    How a Maryland County Created the Gold Standard for Building Emissions Reduction

    Construction Defect Lawsuits Hinted for Dublin, California

    Follow Up on Continental Western v. Shay Construction

    Oregon Supreme Court Confirms Broad Duty to Defend

    CAPSA Changes Now in Effect

    Claim Preclusion: The Doctrine Everyone Thinks They Know But No One Really Knows What it Means in Practice

    Massachusetts Business Court Addresses Defense Cost Allocation and Non-Cumulation Provisions in Long-Tail Context

    CSLB Begins Processing Applications for New B-2 License

    Depreciating Labor Costs May be Factor in Actual Cash Value

    Loss Caused by Theft, Continuous Water Discharge Not Covered

    Insurer Awarded Summary Judgment on Collapse Claim

    Empowering Success: The Advantages of Female Attorneys in Construction Defect Law

    Colorado Springs may be Next Colorado City to Add Construction Defects Ordinance

    Massachusetts Roofer Killed in Nine-story Fall

    FAA Seeks Largest Fine Yet on Drones in Near-Miss Crackdown

    Hybrid Contracts for The Sale of Goods and Services and the Predominant Factor Test

    Hawaii Appellate Court Finds Duty to Defend Group Builders Case

    Scary Movie: Theatre Developer Axed By Court of Appeal In Prevailing Wage Determination Challenge

    After Sixty Years, Subcontractors are Back in the Driver’s Seat in Bidding on California Construction Projects

    Philadelphia Court Rejects Expert Methodology for Detecting Asbestos

    Buy Clean California Act Takes Effect on July 1, 2022

    General Contractor Supporting a Subcontractor’s Change Order Only for Owner to Reject the Change

    Transition Study a Condo Board’s First Defense against Construction Defects

    Texas Federal Court Delivers Another Big Win for Policyholders on CGL Coverage for Construction-Defect Claims and “Rip-and-Tear” Damages

    California Court Invokes Equity to Stretch Anti-Subrogation Rule Principles

    Chinese Telecommunications Ban to Expand to Federally Funded Contracts Effective November 12, 2020

    Colorado SB 15-177 UPDATE: Senate Business, Labor, & Technology Committee Refers Construction Defect Reform Bill to Full Senate

    Reasonableness of Liquidated Damages Determined at Time of Contract (or, You Can’t Look Back Again)

    The Biggest Thing Keeping Young Homebuyers out of the Market Isn't Student Debt

    Introducing Nomos LLP!

    NY Supreme Court Rules City Not Liable for Defective Sidewalk

    ASCE Statement on The Partial Building Collapse in Surfside, Florida

    Construction Project Bankruptcy Law

    Faulty Workmanship may be an Occurrence in Indiana CGL Policies

    Teaching An Old Dog New Tricks: The Spearin Doctrine and Design-Build Projects

    Construction Law: Unexpected, Fascinating, Bizarre

    No Coverage for Additional Insured After Completion of Operations

    Carroll Brock of Larchmont Homes Dies at Age 88

    Damages in First Trial Establishing Liability of Tortfeasor Binding in Bad Faith Trial Against Insurer

    California’s Labor Enforcement Task Force Continues to Set Fire to the Underground Economy

    Insured Entitled to Defense After Posting Medical Records Online

    There Was No Housing Bubble in 2008 and There Isn’t One Now

    West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar Announced for 2014

    Insurer Must Defend Where Possible Continuing Property Damage Occurred

    Manhattan to Add Most Office Space Since ’90 Over 3 Years
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Construction Expert Witness 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 Fairfield'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.

    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Surplus Lines Carrier Can Force Arbitration in Louisiana Despite Statute Limiting Arbitration

    February 12, 2024 —
    The federal district court granted the surplus lines insurer's motion to compel arbitration despite a Louisiana statute barring policies from depriving courts of jurisdiction in cases against insurers. Queens Beauty Supply, LLC v. Indep.Specialty Ins. Co., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 195372 (E.D. La. Oct. 31, 2023). Hurricane Ida damaged property leased by Queens. Queens filed suit against its insurer, Independent Specialty Insurance Company (ISIC) for breath of contract and bad faith for failing to pay the full amount Queens contends it was owed for the damage. ISIC moved to compel arbitration. Queens argued that ISIC waived its right to enforce the policy's arbitration clause by its actions before the court, including failing to opt-out of the settlement program adopted for Hurricane Ida cases. The court disagreed, ISIC had taken no overt act that evidenced a desire to resolve the instant dispute through litigation rather than arbitration. ISIC asserted as an affirmative defense that Queens's claims were barred by the arbitration clause in the policy. ISIC then participated in the settlement program for Hurricane Ida cases, which evidences a desire to settle the dispute, not to resolve it by litigation. Therefore, ISIC had not waived its right to arbitrate. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Partner Jason Taylor and Senior Associate Danielle Kegley Successful in Appeal of Summary Disposition on Priority of Coverage Dispute in the Michigan Court of Appeals

    December 11, 2023 —
    In this appeal brought before the Michigan Court of Appeals, the appellate court ruled in favor of Traub Lieberman’s insurance carrier client (the “Carrier” or “Client”), affirming an award of summary disposition in favor of the Carrier in a coverage lawsuit. The coverage lawsuit involved a priority dispute between the Carrier and another insurer over which company’s policy had responsibility to cover the defense of their mutual insured, a heating and cooling contractor (the “Insured”) in an underlying lawsuit alleging carbon monoxide poisoning. The Carrier issued a contractor’s pollution liability policy and the other insurer issued a commercial general liability policy to the Insurer. Both the Carrier and the other insurer filed cross-motions for summary disposition in the trial court on the priority of coverage issue. The trial court granted the Client’s motion, holding that the CGL carrier was the primary insurer based on the language in the policies’ “other insurance” clauses. The trial court rejected the CGL carrier’s argument to apply the “total policy insuring intent” or “closest to the risk” tests—tests which Michigan courts have not adopted. Specifically, the court rejected the CGL carrier’s argument that the Client’s contractor’s pollution liability policy was more specifically tailored to the loss in the underlying lawsuit. The trial court also rejected CGL carrier’s alternative argument that the “other insurance” clauses in the policies were irreconcilable, requiring a pro rata allocation based on the respective limits of the policies. Reprinted courtesy of Jason Taylor, Traub Lieberman and Danielle K. Kegley, Traub Lieberman Mr. Taylor may be contacted at jtaylor@tlsslaw.com Ms. Kegley may be contacted at dkegley@tlsslaw.com Read the full story...

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Wrap Music to an Insurer’s Ears?”

    February 05, 2024 —
    The general contractor on a New Orleans condominium construction project obtained a Contractor Controlled Insurance Program/CCIP policy or "Wrap-Up" policy for the job. An accident occurred on the job when a construction elevator/hoist fell, injuring several workers. The elevator/hoist was provided by a subcontractor, pursuant to a rental agreement and related subcontract with the general contractor. Contained within the subcontract was a provision which states that the general contractor "has arranged for the Project to be insured under a controlled insurance program (the "CCIP" or "WrapUp"),” and that the CCIP shall provide "commercial general liability insurance and excess liability insurance, in connection with the performance of the Work at the Project site." A third-party administrator for the wrap-up policy had been in communication with the subcontractor prior to the commencement of the work, “specifically advising that insurance coverage was not automatic” and providing the subcontractor with an enrollment form for the CCIP. Ultimately, the subcontractor “declined to comply with the request,” stating that the subcontractor would "not participate in paying any wrap insurance premiums" – because the subcontractor had its own insurance. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Lund III, Phelps
    Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com

    Risky Business: Contractual Versus Equitable Rights of Subrogation

    December 16, 2023 —
    In Zurich Am. Ins. Co. v. Infrastructure Eng’g. Inc., 2023 Ill. App. LEXIS 383, the insurer, Zurich American Insurance Company (Insurer) proceeded as subrogee of Community College District No. 508 d/b/a City Colleges of Chicago and CMO, a Joint Venture. The Appellate Court of Illinois, First District (Appellate Court) addressed whether Insurer – who issued a builder’s risk policy to insure a building during construction – could subrogate on behalf of the building owner, City Colleges of Chicago (City Colleges), who was part of the joint venture and an additional named insured, but who had not been directly paid for the underlying loss. The Appellate Court determined that the policy language established that the carrier was contractually permitted to subrogate on behalf of all additional named insureds on the policy, including the building owner. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kyle Rice, White and Williams
    Mr. Rice may be contacted at ricek@whiteandwilliams.com

    Wyoming Supreme Court Picks a Side After Reviewing the Sutton Rule

    January 16, 2024 —
    In a matter of first impression, the Supreme Court of Wyoming (Supreme Court), in West American Insurance Company v. Black Dog Consulting Inc., No. S-23-0052, 2023 WY 109, 2023 Wyo. LEXIS 111, examined whether a landlord’s insurer could pursue a subrogation claim against a tenant who caused a fire loss. The Supreme Court, applying a case-by-case approach, found that the insurer could not subrogate against the tenant. West American Insurance Company (West) insured Profile Properties (Profile), which owned commercial property in Cheyenne, Wyoming. Black Dog Consulting Inc., d/b/a C.H. Yarber (Yarber) leased commercial space from Profile where it operated a metal fabrication business. The lease agreement between Profile and Yarber required Yarber to pay the full expense of Profile’s blanket insurance policy, which included general commercial liability insurance and fire and extended coverage insurance on the building. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ryan Bennett, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Bennett may be contacted at bennettr@whiteandwilliams.com

    A Matter Judged: Subrogating Insurers Should Beware of Prior Suits Involving the Insured

    March 25, 2024 —
    In New Jersey Mfrs. Ins. Co. v. Lallygone LLC, No. A-2607-22, 2024 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 120, the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey (Appellate Division) considered whether New Jersey Manufacturers Insurance Company (the carrier) could bring a subrogation action after its insured, Efmorfopo Panagiotou (the insured), litigated and tried claims related to the same underlying incident with the same defendant, Lallygone LLC (the defendant). The Appellate Division affirmed the trial court’s finding that the prior lawsuit extinguished the carrier’s claims. In Lallygone LLC, the insured hired the defendant to renovate a detached garage on his property. In March 2022, while the defendant’s employees were removing existing concrete slabs, the garage collapsed. After the incident, the insured stopped paying the defendant. In addition, the insured filed a claim with the carrier, which ultimately paid the insured over $180,000 for the damage under its property policy. The carrier sent a subrogation notice letter to the defendant. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com

    Liability Coverage For Construction Claims May Turn On Narrow Factual Distinctions

    March 25, 2024 —
    In a recent trial court decision, a Montana federal court reminds us how fragile insurance coverage can be for construction-related insurance claims. Specifically, this case illustrates how seemingly small factual nuances can make or break coverage. The case turned on the application of policy provisions familiar to all who deal with these kinds of cases. (See Nautilus Ins. Co. v. Farrens, No. CV 22-193-M-DWM, 2024 WL 885109 (D. Mont. Mar. 1, 2024)) First, the court rebuffed the insurer’s argument that damage resulting from defective workmanship (in this case, the flawed design and installation of an elaborate floating-floor pool system) is not “caused by an occurrence.” The court correctly applied the test followed by most states: if either act causing injury is unintentional or the resulting injury is unexpected or unintended, the “occurrence” requirement is met. Fortunately, the court distinguished sloppy language from earlier Montana federal court decisions suggesting otherwise. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Scott S. Thomas, Payne & Fears
    Mr. Thomas may be contacted at sst@paynefears.com

    Key Economic & Geopolitical Themes To Monitor In 2024

    January 16, 2024 —
    Slowing US Economic Growth and Flattening Interest Rates Growth in the first half of 2023 averaged approximately 2.0%, driven mainly by private sector investments outside of the residential housing sector, government spending, and strong consumer demand. In 2024, The Hartford’s Global Insights Center is expecting investments and government spending to continue and may support growth in the year. However, consumer health may start to weaken due to elevated leverage, higher interest rates, and sticky inflation. Since the Federal Reserve began to increase interest rates, consumer activity and household finances have not been tremendously affected. However, as revolving interest rates (credit card loans) continue to reset that may change, especially since household savings rates fell below pre-pandemic levels and may affect consumer demand. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Global Insights Center Staff, The Hartford