BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up expert witness Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut custom home expert witness Fairfield Connecticut condominiums expert witness Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut custom homes expert witness Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut tract home expert witness Fairfield Connecticut Medical building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut parking structure expert witness Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut retail construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut condominium expert witness Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut production housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut institutional building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking expert witness Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut office building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut multi family design 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


    Pennsylvania Modular Home Builder Buys Maine Firm

    L.A.’s Modest Solution to the ‘Missing Middle’ Housing Problem

    Assignment of Insured's Policy Ineffective

    Workplace Safety–the Unpreventable Employee Misconduct Defense

    Court Rejects Insurer's Argument That Two Triggers Required

    Insurers Subrogating in Arkansas Must Expend Energy to Prove That Their Insureds Have Been Made Whole

    Concerns Over Unstable Tappan Zee Bridge Push Back Opening of New NY Bridge's Second Span

    Owner Bankruptcy: What’s a Contractor to Do?

    North Carolina Court Rules In Favor Of All Sums

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s Los Angeles Office on Another Successful MSJ!

    Ohio Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    New Report Reveals Heavy Civil Construction Less Impacted by COVID-19 Than Commercial Construction

    Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC Recognized Among The Top 50 Construction Law Firms by Construction Executive

    Serving the 558 Notice of Construction Defect Letter in Light of the Statute of Repose

    OSHA Updates: New Submission Requirements for Injury and Illness Records

    Illinois Insureds are Contesting One Carrier's Universal Denial to Covid-19 Losses

    Exceptions to Privette Doctrine Do Not Apply Where There is No Evidence a General Contractor Affirmatively Contributed to the Injuries of an Independent Contractor's Employee

    Filing Lien Foreclosure Lawsuit After Serving Contractor’s Final Payment Affidavit

    Staying the Course, Texas Supreme Court Rejects Insurer’s Argument for Exception to Eight-Corners Rule in Determining Duty to Defend

    Google Advances Green Goal With AES Deal for Carbon-Free Power

    Is the Removal and Replacement of Nonconforming Work Economically Wasteful?

    Super Lawyers Recognized Five Lawyers from Hunton’s Insurance Recovery Group

    What Do I Do With This Stuff? Dealing With Abandoned Property After Foreclosure

    Let the 90-Day Countdown Begin

    CA Senate Report States Caltrans ‘Gagged and Banished’ its Critics

    U.S. Homeowners Are Lingering Longer, and the Wait Is Paying Off

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

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

    2016 Hawaii Legislature Enacts Five Insurance-Related Bills

    Eastern District of Pennsylvania Denies Bad Faith Claim in HO Policy Dispute

    Nevada State Senator Says HOA Scandal Shows Need for Construction Defect Reform

    Is Your Website Accessible And Are You Liable If It Isn't?

    Need to Cover Yourself for “Crisis” Changes on a Job Site? Try These Tips (guest post)

    The Colorado Court of Appeals Rules that a Statutory Notice of Claim Triggers an Insurer’s Duty to Defend.

    BLOK, a Wired UK Hottest 100 Housing Market Startup, Gets Funding from a Renowned Group of Investors

    New Case Alert: Oregon Supreme Court Prohibits Insurer’s Attempt to Relitigate Insured’s Liability

    Is Equipment Installed as Part of Building Renovations a “Product” or “Construction”?

    Could You Be More Specific . . . About My Excess AI Coverage?

    Construction Defect Litigation in Nevada Called "Out of Control"

    Gilbane Project Exec Completes His Mission Against the Odds

    Sioux City Building Owners Sue Architect over Renovation Costs

    EPA Rejects Most of N.Y.’s $511 Million Tappan Zee Loan

    #1 CDJ Topic: McMillin Albany LLC v Superior Court of California

    Goldberg Segalla Welcomes William L. Nimick

    Labor Shortages In Construction

    Oregon Bridge Closed to Inspect for Defects

    Insurer Entitled to Reimbursement of Defense Costs Under Unjust Enrichment Theory

    California Bid Protests: Responsiveness and Materiality

    Ex-Pemex CEO Denies Allegations of Involvement in Brazil Scandal

    Trucks looking for Defects Create Social Media Frenzy
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Construction Expert Witness Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Revolutionizing Buildings with Hybrid Energy Systems and Demand Response

    January 08, 2024 —
    A recent study conducted by the Finnish Building Services 2030 group explores the potential technologies and business prospects for adaptable energy systems within buildings. Building Services 2030 is a Finnish consortium of Aalto University, Tampere University, and 14 industry partners. The consortium has defined a shared vision for the Finnish building service sector and researches topics that help reach the vision. My company is responsible for the group’s communication, so I eagerly read the research reports as they come out. One of the new reports I found very timely is about the energy flexibility of buildings. The authors are Senior Researcher Juha Jokisalo and Professor Matti Lehtonen from Aalto University. They highlight how the contemporary energy landscape is undergoing a significant transformation. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Top Developments March 2024

    April 22, 2024 —
    CLAIMS-MADE COVERAGE Zurich Am. Ins. Co. v. Syngenta Crop Prot. LLC, 2024 Del. LEXIS 68 (Del. Feb. 26, 2024) Delaware Supreme Court concludes that a letter from a lawyer informing an insured of possible lawsuits without identifying potential plaintiffs or demanding payment is not a “claim for damages” within the meaning of claims-made CGL and umbrella liability policies. Citing case law from Delaware and other jurisdictions, it reasoned that, in the ordinary sense, a “claim for damages” (which the policies did not define) is “a demand or request for monetary relief by or on behalf of an identifiable claimant.” According to the court, the letter in question did not meet this definition because it did not identify any claimants “except in the vaguest terms” or request monetary relief on any claimant’s behalf, but rather communicated only a threat of future litigation. As a result, the letter was not a claim made before the policy periods at issue. POLLUTION EXCLUSION Wesco Ins. Co. v. Brad Ingram Constr., 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 1488 (9th Cir. Jan. 23, 2024) A divided Ninth Circuit panel, applying California law, holds that a pollution exclusion* in a CGL policy does not preclude a duty to defend an underlying suit alleging physical injury from exposure to “clouds of toxic dust” deposited in the environment by a wildfire and released during clean up efforts. Citing MacKinnon v. Truck Ins. Exch., 73 P.3d 1205 (Cal. 2003), the majority explained that determining whether a “pollution event” (i.e., “environmental pollution”) resulting in excluded injury has occurred involves consideration of “the character of the injurious substance” and whether the exposure resulted from a “mechanism specified in the policy.” It concluded that a potential for coverage (and, therefore, a defense obligation) existed because, although wildfire debris may be considered a “pollutant” in certain circumstances, the mechanism alleged in the underlying complaint – “expos[ure] . . . to clouds of toxic dust during the loading and unloading of [the underlying plaintiff’s] truck” – did not clearly constitute an “event commonly thought of as pollution.” Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    NTSB Faults Maintenance, Inspection Oversight for Fern Hollow Bridge Collapse

    March 19, 2024 —
    The City of Pittsburgh’s failure to act for more than a decade on repeated maintenance and repair recommendations regarding the Fern Hollow Bridge was the probable cause for the structure’s dramatic 2022 collapse, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) said at its Feb. 21, 2024, meeting. The city is the owner of the bridge. Reprinted courtesy of Jim Parsons, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com Read the full story...

    Arizona Is Smart About Water. It Should Stay That Way.

    February 19, 2024 —
    You really have to hand it to Arizona: Even as its population has doubled and it has suffered through a decades long megadrought, the state uses less water today than it did 40 years ago. This success story is the result of what may be the smartest, most conservative approach to water in the country. But homebuilders want to scrap some key elements of this careful system. It’s a bad idea, especially as the climate changes, making the state’s water supply less reliable. And it’s a cautionary tale for the rest of us as we try to adapt to a warming world. In 1980, alarmed at watching its precious groundwater disappear amid rapid development, Arizona passed the Groundwater Management Act. The law established the Arizona Department of Water Resources, set up water-management zones around cities and required new housing developments to prove they had access to 100 years’ worth of clean water, among other things. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Mark Gongloff, Bloomberg

    Enforceability of Contract Provisions Extending Liquidated Damages Beyond Substantial Completion

    April 15, 2024 —
    This post takes a look at the enforceability of contract provisions providing for liquidated delay damages after substantial completion. Typically, the assessment of liquidated delay damages ends at substantial completion of a project. However, various standard form contracts, including some of the ConsensusDocs and EJCDC contracts, contain elections allowing for the parties to agree on the use of liquidated damages for failing to achieve substantial completion, final completion, or project milestones. The standard language in the AIA A201 leaves it up to the parties to define the circumstances under which liquidated damages will be awarded. Courts are split on the enforceability of provisions that seek to assess liquidated damages beyond substantial completions. Courts in some jurisdictions will not impose liquidated damages after the date of substantial completion on the ground that liquidated damages would otherwise become a penalty if assessed after the owner has put the project to its intended use. Perini Corp. v. Greate Bay Hotel & Casino, Inc., 129 N.J. 479, 610 A.2d 364 (1992). When the terms are clear, other jurisdictions will enforce contract terms providing for liquidated damages until final completion, even if the owner has taken beneficial use of the facility. Carrothers Const. Co. v. City of S. Hutchinson, 288 Kan. 743, 207 P.3d 231 (2009). Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Stu Richeson, Phelps
    Mr. Richeson may be contacted at stuart.richeson@phelps.com

    Insurer's Bad Faith is Actionable Tort for Purposes of Choice of Law Analysis

    January 08, 2024 —
    When an insurer handles a claim in violation of its duty to act in good faith, policyholders are often eager to sue the insurer for bad faith, seeking extra contractual damages. Before filing suit, however, it is critical that policyholders consider what state’s law applies to the bad faith claim. In the recent case of Scott Fetzer Co. v. Am. Home Assurance Co., Inc.1, the Ohio Supreme Court held that Restatement (Second), Conflict of Laws, § 145 (“Section 145"), governed the choice of law dispute, which meant that the insured would be able to obtain discovery of Travelers’ claims-handling procedures, guidelines, internal documents, and communications relating to the claim.2 The insured, Scott Fetzer, argued that the materials were discoverable because documents evidencing an insurer’s bad faith are not protected by attorney-client privilege in Ohio. In response, Travelers argued that the laws of either Indiana (the place where the parties entered into the insurance contract), or Michigan (the location of the insured risk) governed the discovery dispute because Restatement (Second) § 193 (“Section 193”) governs the choice of law analysis for claims that “arise out of insurance contracts.”3 The laws of either Indiana or Michigan were more favorable for Travelers because Indiana does not allow discovery of materials covered by attorney-client privilege, and Michigan does not even recognize a cause of action for bad faith. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Janeen M. Thomas, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Thomas may be contacted at JThomas@sdvlaw.com

    Traub Lieberman Partner Michael K. Kiernan and Associate Brandon Christian Obtain Dismissal with Prejudice in Favor of Defendant

    November 27, 2023 —
    In a 14-count breach of contract action brought in the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in Palm Beach County, Florida, Partner Michael K. Kiernan and Associate Brandon Christian obtained dismissal with prejudice in favor of Defendant St. Joseph’s Episcopal Church of Boynton Beach, Florida (“Church”). Plaintiffs, St. Joseph’s Episcopal School (“School”) and its benefactor, William Swaney, filed suit to enforce an alleged 99-year oral lease agreement which Swaney asserted had been made to him by a prior rector of the Church in exchange for his contributions to the School. Plaintiffs also sought emergency injunctive relief to allow the School to continue to operate on Church property. The Church maintained in part that the only lease in effect was a written lease, approved by the Church Vestry and the Diocese of Southeast Florida, and which the Church Vestry unanimously voted not to renew in 2022. Reprinted courtesy of Michael K. Kiernan, Traub Lieberman and Brandon Christian, Traub Lieberman Mr. Kiernan may be contacted at mkiernan@tlsslaw.com Mr. Christian may be contacted at bchristian@tlsslaw.com Read the full story...

    Future Army Corps Rulings on Streams and Wetlands: Changes and Delays Ahead

    November 06, 2023 —
    New regulations published by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers dramatically reduce federal protections of previously regulated streams and wetlands. This change will lead to further controversy and litigation as the legal terms are applied to physical features on the ground leading to conflicting interpretations by the regulated public, environmentalists and federal agencies. Reprinted courtesy of Mark Sudol, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com Read the full story...