BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing expert witness Salisbury Connecticut hospital construction expert witness Salisbury Connecticut structural steel construction expert witness Salisbury Connecticut mid-rise construction expert witness Salisbury Connecticut custom homes expert witness Salisbury Connecticut condominium expert witness Salisbury Connecticut casino resort expert witness Salisbury Connecticut townhome construction expert witness Salisbury Connecticut concrete tilt-up expert witness Salisbury Connecticut multi family housing expert witness Salisbury Connecticut high-rise construction expert witness Salisbury Connecticut institutional building expert witness Salisbury Connecticut custom home expert witness Salisbury Connecticut parking structure expert witness Salisbury Connecticut low-income housing expert witness Salisbury Connecticut Subterranean parking expert witness Salisbury Connecticut landscaping construction expert witness Salisbury Connecticut Medical building expert witness Salisbury Connecticut office building expert witness Salisbury Connecticut retail construction expert witness Salisbury Connecticut tract home expert witness Salisbury Connecticut condominiums expert witness Salisbury Connecticut
    Salisbury Connecticut soil failure expert witnessSalisbury Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationSalisbury Connecticut stucco expert witnessSalisbury Connecticut building envelope expert witnessSalisbury Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionSalisbury Connecticut construction expertsSalisbury Connecticut reconstruction expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Salisbury, Connecticut

    Connecticut Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Case law precedent


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Salisbury 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 Association of Connecticut (State)
    Local # 0700
    3 Regency Dr Ste 204
    Bloomfield, CT 06002

    Salisbury Connecticut Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Salisbury Connecticut Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Salisbury Connecticut Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Salisbury Connecticut Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Salisbury Connecticut Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders & Remo Assn of Fairfield Co
    Local # 0780
    433 Meadow St
    Fairfield, CT 06824

    Salisbury Connecticut Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Salisbury Connecticut


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

    Couple Claims ADA Renovation Lead to Construction Defects

    Are Proprietary Specifications Illegal?

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

    Toolbox Talk Series: Direct Versus Consequential Damages--Is There a Clear Demarcation?

    New York Team Secures Dismissal of Premises Liability Action Against Client

    Mediation Scheduled for Singer's Construction Defect Claims

    Insured’s Motion to Compel Production of Underwriting Materials Granted

    "On Second Thought"

    How to Build Climate Change-Resilient Infrastructure

    Texas Legislative Update

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

    Don’t Be the First One to Breach Your Construction Contract

    Motions to Dismiss, Limitations of Liability, and More

    California Appeals Court Remands Fine in Late Completion Case

    Restaurant Wants SCOTUS to Dust Off Eleventh Circuit’s “Physical Loss” Ruling

    "Is the Defective Work Covered by Insurance?"

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

    You're Doing Construction in Russia, Now What?

    Connecticut’s New False Claims Act Increases Risk to Public Construction Participants

    Housing Stocks Rally at End of November

    The Overlooked Nevada Rule In an Arena Project Lawsuit

    Reminder: In Court (as in life) the Worst Thing You Can Do Is Not Show Up

    Architecture, Robotics, and the Importance of Human Interaction – An Interview with Prof. Kathrin Dörfler

    Don’t Put All Your Eggs in the Silent-Cyber Basket

    Developer Boymelgreen Forced to Hand Over Financial Records for 15 Broad Street

    Carbon Sequestration Can Combat Global Warming, Sometimes in Unexpected Ways

    Construction Up in United States

    EPA Threatens Cut in California's Federal Highway Funds

    Travelers’ 3rd Circ. Win Curbs Insurers’ Asbestos Exposure

    Brooklyn’s Industry City to Get $1 Billion Modernization

    XL Group Pairs with America Contractor’s Insurance Group to Improve Quality of Construction

    A Subcontractor’s Perspective On California’s Recent Changes to Indemnity Provisions

    Allegations in Insured’s Complaint Sufficient to Survive Motion to Dismiss

    Ninth Circuit Holds That Policies Covering Environmental Claims Do Not Have Aggregate Limits

    Counterpoint: Washington Supreme Court to Rule on Resulting Losses in Insurance Disputes

    Tetra Tech-U.S. Cleanup Dispute in San Francisco Grows

    Comparative Breach of Contract – The New Benefit of the Bargain in Construction?

    Manhattan Developer Wants Claims Dismissed in Breach of Contract Suit

    Bad Faith Claim Survives Summary Judgment

    An Additional Insured’s Reasonable Expectations may be Different from the Named Insured’s and Must be Considered to Determine whether the Additional Insured is Entitled to Defense from the Insurer of a Commercial Excess & Umbrella Liability Policy

    CAUTION: Terms of CCP Section 998 Offers to Compromise Must Be Fully Contained in the Offer Itself

    A Game of Texas Hold’em: How Texas Stopped Wage Increases for Salaried Exempt Employees Nationwide

    The Evolution of Construction Jobsite Safety: Lessons From the Field

    Know your Obligations: Colorado’s Statutory Expansions of the Implied Warranty of Habitability Are Now in Effect

    Rightfully Recovering Under a Coblentz Agreement

    Unlicensed Contracting and Florida Statute S. 489.128

    The International Codes Development Process is Changing to Continue Building Code Modernization

    The Need to Be Specific and Precise in Drafting Settling Agreements

    North Carolina Should Protect Undocumented Witnesses to Charlotte Scaffolding Deaths, Unions Say
    Corporate Profile

    SALISBURY CONNECTICUT CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Salisbury, 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 Salisbury'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
    Salisbury, Connecticut

    Insurer Cannot Dispose of Water Leak or Bad Faith Claims on Motion for Summary Judgment

    July 20, 2026 —
    The insurer’s motion for summary judgment seeking to eliminate the insured’s claims for damage from a water leak, bad faith and punitive damages failed. Nargizyan v, State Farm General Ins. Co., 2026 Cal App. LEXIS 302 (Cal. Ct. App. April 15, 2026). The insured noticed tiles on his kitchen floor were warmer than usual. He found water dripping from the top of the crawl space under the house. He noticed water was “dripping in different places” but not pouring like a faucet. “There were too many places to count where water was dripping and there was water all over the place.” Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    RONI: What You Lose by Not Investing in AI – With Sam Zolfagharian

    September 21, 2026 —
    Sam Zolfagharian returns to the AEC Business Podcast for her second appearance. She is an AI strategist, keynote speaker, and the author of two books, Disrupt It and Future by Design. She spoke at the AI in AEC conference in Helsinki in March, and we picked up the conversation where that keynote left off. The starting point was a question her clients keep raising. Executives are being asked by their boards about the return on their AI investments, and many of them do not have an answer they trust. This episode is about what to measure instead, and when the dollar figure finally becomes the right number to look at. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    D.C. Circuit Upholds EPA’s CERCLA Hazardous-Substance Designations for PFAS as State-Law Settlements Highlight Expanding Liability Landscape

    September 15, 2026 —
    On August 18, 2026, a unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld the 2024 designation by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) as hazardous substances under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund). (See Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al. v. EPA, No. 24-1193 (D.C. Cir. Aug. 18, 2026).) The decision leaves EPA’s PFOA and PFOS hazardous substance designations in place and provides guidance on the scope of EPA’s authority to make future hazardous substances designations under CERCLA Section 102(a). The decision also likely resolves a challenge to the rule that has spanned two presidential administrations. After taking office, the Trump administration had obtained an abeyance of the litigation challenging the Biden-era rule while EPA reconsidered its position. In September 2025, EPA informed the court that it had decided to retain the designations, while signaling that it would work with Congress and industry to address CERCLA liability concerns for “passive receivers.” The litigation then resumed, with the current Administration defending the rule. Reprinted courtesy of Ashleigh K. Myers, Pillsbury, Amanda G. Halter, Pillsbury, Jillian Marullo, Pillsbury and Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury Ms. Myers may be contacted at ashleigh.myers@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Halter may be contacted at amanda.halter@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Marullo may be contacted at jillian.marullo@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com Read the full story...

    New Executive Order Prohibits Federal Contractors from Engaging in DEI Through Employment and Procurement Activities

    April 27, 2026 —
    On March 26, 2026, President Trump signed Executive Order 14398, entitled Addressing DEI Discrimination by Federal Contractors, requiring federal agencies to add contractual language in all federal contracts prohibiting contractors and subcontractors from engaging in any racially discriminatory DEI activities, as defined by the Executive Order (EO). While this EO includes language similar to prior DEI-related orders, it introduces a significant expansion in enforcement by subjecting non-compliant contractors to liability under the False Claims Act (FCA), including exposure to whistleblower actions and qui tam litigation. A qui tam claim is a civil action by a private individual on behalf of the government alleging fraud against federal programs and seeking to recover damages. The new EO states that involvement in any racially discriminatory DEI activities is not only unethical and illegal, but also deemed fraudulent against federal programs because it is material to the government’s payment decisions. The definition of DEI activities here matters, as this EO expands a contractor’s obligations beyond the management of its employment policies and includes prohibitions against funding or expending time or resources on DEI activities and contracting with subcontractors, vendors, or suppliers utilizing DEI programs. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Laura De Santos, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani
    Ms. De Santos may be contacted at ldesantos@grsm.com

    Sausage-Making Often Relies on the Good Sense of the Chef Rather than the Recipe

    June 23, 2026 —
    Even for lawyers, the rules governing litigation can get complex and convoluted. Does something need to be filed? What needs to be filed? When is the deadline for filing? Simple questions with not always with straightforward answers. This was the case in R & J Sheet Metal, Inc. v. W.E. O’Neil Construction Co. of California, 111 Cal.App.5th 878 (2025), which involved sheet metal panels lost when they fell into the Port of Long Beach harbor. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret D. Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    White and Williams LLP Secures Trio of Cyber Coverage Wins

    May 12, 2026 —
    Three weeks, three jurisdictions, three cyber wins. White and Williams picked up the first victory on March 9, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, where the court granted summary judgment to their client enforcing a Cyber Crime Loss sublimit. See Perry & Perry Builders, Inc. v. Cowbell Cyber and Obsidian Specialty Ins. Co., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49409 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 9, 2026). In Perry, the insured was deceived into transferring money intended for a vendor to an unintended third party. The insurer acknowledged that the loss was covered and paid the insured the policy’s Cyber Crime Loss sublimit. Discontent with a single sublimit, the insured argued that because it wired the money to the fraudster in separate transfers, it was entitled to a second Cyber Crime Loss sublimit. Reprinted courtesy of Gabriel Darwick, White and Williams LLP and Sean Elman, White and Williams LLP Mr. Darwick may be contacted at darwickg@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Elman may be contacted at elmans@whiteandwilliams.com Read the full story...

    The Goal Is the Repair, Not the Lawsuit: What Colorado HOA Boards Should Consider Before Suing a Builder

    September 08, 2026 —
    Fourteen years ago, we cautioned Colorado homeowners associations against a “ready, fire, aim” approach to construction-defect litigation. In The Hidden Dangers of Construction Defect Litigation, we suggested a fairly simple proposition: when legitimate construction defects exist, the goal should be to get them repaired. Litigation should be a last resort, not an end in itself. Much has changed in Colorado construction-defect law since then. But a recent Douglas County case, and significant amendments to the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act (“CCIOA”) enacted in 2025, provide good reasons for HOA board members and owners to revisit that basic premise. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gail Gudder, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Ms. Gudder may be contacted at gudder@hhmrlaw.com

    Suit Limitation Provision Eliminates Wind Loss Claim

    July 27, 2026 —
    The insurer’s motion for judgment on the pleadings was granted after the insured failed to file suit against the insurer within the policy’s two-year suit limitation provision. Interstate Investments, LLC v. Mt. Hawley Ins Co., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98108 (S.D. N. Y. May 4, 2026). On or before June 27, 2023, a wind, hail and rainstorm damaged Interstate’s property in Oklahoma. Interstate filed a claim under its policy with Mt. Hawley. The policy provided that New York law applied and contained a two- year suit limitation provision. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com