BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut Medical building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut casino resort expert witness Fairfield Connecticut custom home expert witness Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking expert witness Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut institutional building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut retail construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up expert witness Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut production housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut industrial building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut condominiums expert witness Fairfield Connecticut custom homes expert witness Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut office building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut condominium expert witness Fairfield Connecticut parking structure expert witness Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield 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


    Difficulty in Defending Rental Supplier’s Claim Under Credit Application

    Freddie Mac Eases Mortgage Rules to Limit Putbacks

    Rich NYC Suburbs Fight Housing Plan They Say Will ‘Destroy’ Them

    Don’t Kick the Claim Until the End of the Project: Timely Give Notice and Preserve Your Claims on Construction Projects

    Show Me the Money: The Good Faith Dispute Exception to Prompt Payment Penalties

    ACEC Research Institute Releases New Engineering Industry Forecast

    California Court of Appeal Clarifies Intent of Faulty Workmanship Exclusions

    New York Developers Facing Construction Defect Lawsuit

    NY Estimating Consultant Settles $3.1M Government Project Fraud Case

    Significant Ruling in PFAS Litigation Could Impact Insurance Coverage

    Impact of Lis Pendens on Unrecorded Interests / Liens

    Aging-in-Place Features Becoming Essential for Many Home Buyers

    Texas Court Construes Breach of Contract Exclusion Narrowly in Duty-to-Defend Case

    Construction Defects and Warranties in Maryland

    Construction Defect Case Not Over, Despite Summary Judgment

    April Rise in Construction Spending Not That Much

    Privette: The “Affirmative Contribution” Exception, How Far Does It Go?

    Tidal Lagoon Plans Marine Project to Power Every Home in Wales

    West Coast Casualty’s 25th Construction Defect Seminar Has Begun

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (08/08/23) – Buy and Sell With AI, Urban Real Estate Demand and Increasing Energy Costs

    Detect and Prevent Construction Fraud

    Homeowner's Mold Claim Denied Due to Spoilation

    SEC Approves New Securitization Risk Retention Rule with Broad Exception for Qualified Residential Mortgages

    No Coverage for Restoring Aesthetic Uniformity

    Don’t Get Caught Holding the Bag: Hold the State Liable When General Contractor Fails to Pay on a Public Project

    Delaware “occurrence” and exclusions j(5) and j(6)

    Lakewood First City in Colorado to Pass Ordinance Limiting State Construction Defect Law

    Does a No-Damage-for-Delay Clause Also Preclude Acceleration Damages?

    Netherlands’ Developer Presents Modular Homes for Young Professionals

    Court Addresses Damages Under Homeowners Insurance Policy

    Understanding the Miller Act

    Wood Smith Henning & Berman LLP Expands into Georgia

    Illinois Court Addresses Coverage Owed For Subcontractor’s Defective Work

    Legal Matters Escalate in Aspen Condo Case

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (11/03/21)

    House Passes Bill to Delay EPA Ozone Rule

    Colorado Construction Defect Action Reform: HB 17-1279 Approved by Colorado Legislature; Governor’s Approval Imminent

    Nevada Supreme Court Holds That Insureds Can Use Extrinsic Evidence to Prove Duty to Defend

    #2 CDJ Topic: Valley Crest Landscape v. Mission Pools

    Lightstone Committing $2 Billion to Hotel Projects

    DOD Contractors Receive Reprieve on Implementation of Chinese Telecommunications Ban

    Restoring the USS Alabama: Surety Lessons From an 80-Year-Old Battleship

    Mechanic’s Liens- Big Exception

    Intellectual Property And Employment Law Best Practices: Are You Covering Your Bases In Protecting Construction-Related Trade Secrets?

    Retrofitting Buildings Is the Unsexy Climate Fix the World Needs

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

    Feds, County Seek Delay in Houston $7B Road Widening Over Community Impact

    Changes to Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act in New York Introduced

    English High Court Finds That Business-Interruption Insurance Can Cover COVID-19 Losses

    Quick Note: Expert Testimony – Back to the Frye Test in Florida
    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

    Waiving Consequential Damages—What Could Go Wrong?

    March 19, 2024 —
    You are inexcusably late with construction of a football stadium, a casino, or similar project that generates large income for the owner. The indirect damages, often referred to as consequential damages, that flow from the delay can be astronomical to the point of breaking your company if it must pay them. As a result, many construction contracts, at every tier, contain a provision that waives consequential damages. By this waiver, a party seeks to limit its risk for these damages. Over the years, courts have interpreted these provisions in a widely variable and inconsistent manner. The courts typically start with the specific language of the waiver to discern the parties’ intent. Thus, the language of the provision itself is critical. But construction professionals should not overlook other provisions in the contract that may have an impact on a court’s analysis of the parties’ intent. As one of my colleagues likes to say, “the large print giveth and the small print taketh away.” Reprinted courtesy of Curtis W. Martin, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Kellie M. Ros, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@pecklaw.com Ms. Ros may be contacted at kros@pecklaw.com Read the full story...

    First Circuit Rejects Insurer’s “Insupportable” Duty-to-Cooperate Defense in Arson Coverage Suit

    October 24, 2023 —
    In Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Co. v. BAS Holding Corp., the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit rejected an insurer’s “insupportable” defense that the insured company had breached its duty to cooperate by refusing the insurer’s request for an examination under oath of the company’s president. The decision is a reminder that, while examinations under oath can be effective tools to allow the insurer to properly investigate a claim, an insured’s duty to cooperate is not boundless and does not demand attendance at examinations that are not reasonably requested. Background BAS Holding involves the destruction of a landmark building in Boston by an arsonist. The owner, BAS Holding Corporation, submitted an insurance claim to its property insurer to recover insurance proceeds for the damage to the building. The insurer investigated the claim to determine whether the damage to the building was covered and issued a reservation of rights letter suggesting that the policy may not provide coverage for the fire. As part of its investigation, the insurer requested an examination under oath as a condition to coverage under the policy, which led to BAS presenting the property’s operations coordinator for an interview. Shortly after examining the operations coordinator, the insurer sought another examination of BAS’s president and owner, as well as five other employees. In response, BAS questioned whether the additional examinations were “reasonably required” and said that it would consider the requests if the insurer could explain why they were necessary. Reprinted courtesy of Geoffrey B. Fehling, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Yaniel Abreu, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Fehling may be contacted at gfehling@HuntonAK.com Mr. Abreu may be contacted at yabreu@HuntonAK.com Read the full story...

    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

    Missouri Protects Subrogation Rights

    April 15, 2024 —
    The point at which an insurance carrier possesses the equitable right of subrogation is an issue on which the states have differed. Some allow carriers to pursue rights of subrogation immediately upon payment and some have taken stricter approaches. Missouri falls into the latter group. By not allowing the carrier the right to file suit against third-party tortfeasors until the insured provides its carrier with an assignment of all its rights, Missouri’s approach has opened the door for challenges to subrogation rights. In Megown v. Auto Club Fam. Ins. Co., 2024 Mo. App. LEXIS 82, the plaintiff-insureds Michael and Jane Megown (the Megowns) suffered a house fire on February 8, 2016. Their insurance carrier, Auto Club Family Insurance Company (Auto Club) reimbursed the Megowns for their property damage in the amount of $722,433.56. Subsequently, the Megowns sued Auto Club for breach of contract and later amended their complaint to add claims against Tyberius Enterprises, LLC d/b/a Crag Electric (Craig Electric), the third-party tortfeasor, for direct negligence, alleging both property damage and personal injuries. Auto Club intervened in the Megowns’ claim against Craig Electric to protect its interest as subrogee for its property damage payment to the Megowns. Craig Electric settled prior to trial, paying $1,000,000.00 to both the Megowns and Auto Club, to be allocated at a later date. After a bench trial that apportioned the settlement with $722,433.56 paid to Auto Club and $277,566.44 paid to Megowns – and a jury trial awarding no further damages – the Megowns appealed. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lian Skaf, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Skaf may be contacted at skafl@whiteandwilliams.com

    Emerging World Needs $1.5 Trillion for Green Buildings, IFC Says

    December 11, 2023 —
    The International Finance Corporation is looking to develop a guarantee facility for private investors to boost finance for greener construction in emerging markets, as growing populations, urbanization and industrialization are set to spur pollution far beyond safe limits. IFC, the world’s largest global development institution focused on the private sector in low-income countries, is working with its counterparts in the World Bank Group to “create a one-stop shop for guarantees offered to private investors,” Susan Lund, vice president for economics and private sector development, told Bloomberg in an interview. We have “really high aspirations to scale that up dramatically for climate finance and in particular for green buildings and decarbonizing the construction sector,” she said. Lund’s comments follow a recent speech given by World Bank President Ajay Banga who said the bank is working to better unify guarantee insurance across the institutions. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Natasha White, Bloomberg

    Calling Hurricanes a Category 6 Risks Creating Deadly Confusion

    March 25, 2024 —
    Category 5 has become part of the world’s lexicon to describe a disaster of monumental proportion. Now, thanks to climate change, a pair of scientists don’t think that is a dire enough level to describe hurricanes. They raise the possibility, on a “hypothetical” basis, for a Category 6. Global warming has increased the energy available for storms to grow stronger, according to a paper by Michael Wehner, senior scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, and James Kossin, climate and atmospheric professor at the University of Wisconsin. Their work was published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the US. The scientists make a case for adjusting the five-step, Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale, which is used to describe hurricane power. A Category 5 is assigned when storm winds reach 157 miles per hour, and today that goes up to the limit of physics. Wehner and Kossin suggest considering anything over 192 mph a Category 6. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian K Sullivan, Bloomberg

    The Prolonged Effects on Commercial Property From Extreme Weather

    January 29, 2024 —
    As evidenced by the extraordinary heat in the Southwest, a string of tornadoes in South and Midwest, and heavy rains in California and Florida, 2023 was a banner year for extreme weather. However, 2024 may be no different, which means now is the time for businesses to rethink the way they approach volatile weather, as well as the frequency and severity of storms and natural disasters. The risks and challenges that businesses face as extreme weather becomes stronger and causes more property damage, requires innovative technology with specialized insurance solutions. Through updated building codes, advancements in technology and meaningful infrastructure improvements, businesses can make a difference in protecting their property and reducing losses. Stronger Building Codes To Withstand Storms It is not uncommon to see the destruction that a hurricane or tornado leaves behind. However, stronger building codes are one of the best ways to make sure property can withstand catastrophes. Florida for example implemented changes to its building codes after Hurricane Andrew, and then again in 2007 after the Hurricanes of 2004 and 2005. New construction since then has made houses and buildings significantly more hurricane proof. Buildings constructed 30 years ago were likely built with codes that may have neglected the impact of strong winds from an extreme hurricane or significant rainfall that a storm can bring, especially along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Hartford Staff, The Hartford Insights

    Leftover Equipment and Materials When a Contractor Is Abruptly Terminated

    November 06, 2023 —
    Termination for cause is costly and adversarial and has been covered in this article. But can a terminating party use equipment and tools left behind on the worksite (i.e., a crane)? The answer depends on what is in your contract. Under ConsensusDocs, a constructor must give its permission to use any equipment or supplies left at the worksite, such as a crane.[i] Moreover, the owner must indemnify the constructor for using their equipment. This makes sense because even if a constructor were appropriately terminated for cause, using their equipment and materials they no longer possess or control unfairly creates additional liability exposure. At a minimum, the owner should take on the risk of using the equipment and materials since they benefit from such use. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian Perlberg, ConsensusDocs Coalition
    Mr. Perlberg may be contacted at bperlberg@ConsensusDocs.org