BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut tract home expert witness Fairfield Connecticut industrial building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut custom homes expert witness Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut Medical building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut condominiums expert witness Fairfield Connecticut housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking expert witness Fairfield Connecticut production housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut condominium expert witness Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up expert witness Fairfield Connecticut parking structure expert witness Fairfield Connecticut retail construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut custom home expert witness Fairfield Connecticut office building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windows
    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


    How Machine Learning Can Help with Urban Development

    Real-Estate Pros Fight NYC Tax on Wealthy Absentee Owners

    Balestreri Potocki & Holmes Attorneys Named 2020 Super Lawyers and Rising Star

    California Supreme Court Addresses “Good Faith” Construction Disputes Under Prompt Payment Laws

    An Era of Legends

    Sometimes You Get Away with Unwritten Contracts. . .

    No One to Go After for Construction Defects at Animal Shelter

    Another Defect Found on the Bay Bridge: Water Leakage

    Excessive Corrosion Cause of Ohio State Fair Ride Accident

    Fifth Circuit Certifies Eight-Corners Duty to Defend Issue to Texas Supreme Court

    $5 Million Construction Defect Lawsuit over Oregon Townhomes

    Proving Impacts to Critical Path to Defeat Liquidated Damages Assessment

    Corps Issues Draft EIS for Controversial Alaskan Copper Mine

    Attorneys’ Fees Are Available in Arizona Eviction Actions

    White and Williams Announces Lawyer Promotions

    Ninth Circuit Holds that 1993 Budget Appropriations Language Does Not Compel the Corps of Engineers to use 1987 Wetlands Guidance Indefinitely

    New Insurance Case: Owners'​ Insurance Barred in Reimbursement Action against Tenant

    Californians Swarm Few Listings Cuts to Affordable Homes

    A Look Back at the Ollies

    Court Again Defines Extent of Contractor’s Insurance Coverage

    Scope of Alaska’s Dump Lien Statute Substantially Reduced For Natural Gas Contractors

    U.K. Construction Growth Unexpectedly Accelerated in January

    Best Lawyers Honors 43 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys, Recognizes Three Partners as 'Lawyers of The Year'

    With No Evidence of COVID-19 Being Present, DC Trial Court Finds No Claim for Business Interruption

    Why Is California Rebuilding in Fire Country? Because You’re Paying for It

    Hunton Insurance Partner, Larry Bracken, Elected to the American College of Coverage Counsel

    Granting Stay, Federal Court Reviews Construction Defect Coverage in Hawaii

    Social Engineering Scams Are On the Rise – Do I Have Insurance Coverage for That?

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Rise Most Since February 2006

    An Obligation to Provide Notice and an Opportunity to Cure May not End after Termination, and Why an Early Offer of Settlement Should Be Considered on Public Works Contracts

    Reinventing the Building Envelope – Interview with Gordon A Geddes

    Under Colorado House Bill 17-1279, HOA Boards Now Must Get Members’ Informed Consent Before Bringing A Construction Defect Action

    Merger to Create Massive Los Angeles Construction Firm

    Municipalities Owe a Duty to Pedestrians Regardless of Whether a Sidewalk Presents an “Open and Obvious” Hazardous Condition. (WA)

    Lasso Needed to Complete Vegas Hotel Implosion

    High Court Could Alter Point-Source Discharge Definition in Taking Clean-Water Case

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Collapse Coverage Fails

    Bridges Crumble as Muni Rates at Least Since ’60s Ignored

    Nevada OSHA Provides Additional Requirements for Construction Employers to Address Feasibility of Social Distancing at Construction Sites

    New Plan Submitted for Explosive Demolition of Old Tappan Zee Bridge

    Florida Governor Signs COVID-19 Liability Shield

    New Pedestrian, Utility Bridge Takes Shape on Everett Waterfront

    Forget the Apple Watch. Apple’s Next Biggest Thing Isn’t for Sale

    Home Building Up in Kansas City

    Address 'Your Work' Exposure Within CPrL Policies With Faulty Workmanship Coverage

    Assessing Defective Design Liability on Federal Design-Build Projects

    Professional Liability and Attorney-Client Privilege Bulletin: Intra-Law Firm Communications

    Mandatory Attorneys’ Fee Award for Actions Brought Under the Underground Utility Damage Prevention Act

    Nevada Bill Would Bring Changes to Construction Defects

    California Supreme Court to Examine Arbitration Provisions in Several Upcoming Cases
    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

    Implied Warranty Claims–Not Just a Seller’s Risk: Builders Beware!

    May 10, 2021 —
    One of the thorns in the side of every construction defect defense litigator is the implied warranty claim. The “implied warranty” is a promise that Colorado law is “implied” into every contract for a sale of a new home that the home was built in a workmanlike manner and is suitable for habitation. Defense attorneys dislike the implied warranty claim because it is akin to a strict liability standard. All that is required to provide the claim is that an aspect of construction is found to be defective — i.e., inconsistent with the building code or manufacturer’s installation instructions — regardless of whether the work was performed to the standard of care. The implied warranty claim is therefore easier to prove than a negligence claim, where a claimant must prove that a construction professional’s work fell below a standard of reasonable care. Additionally, it is not a defense to an implied warranty claim that the homeowners or the HOA are, themselves, partially liable for the defects where damage is due in part to insufficient or deferred maintenance, as it is for negligence claims. The only redeeming aspect to the implied warranty claim was that, until recently, it was believed that it could only be asserted by a first purchaser against the seller of an improvement, because the implied warranty arises out of the sale contract. Recently, the Colorado Court of Appeals opinion in Brooktree Village Homeowners Association v. Brooktree Village, LLC, 19CA1635, decided on November 19, 2020, extended the reach of the implied warranty — though just how far remains to be seen. Specifically, a division of the Court of Appeals held that an HOA can assert implied warranty claims on behalf of its members for defects in common areas, even where there is no direct contractual relationship between the parties to base the warranty upon. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Carin Ramirez, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Ms. Ramirez may be contacted at ramirez@hhmrlaw.com

    When Employer’s Liability Coverage May Be Limited in New York

    June 28, 2021 —
    New York recognizes that coverage under Workers’ Compensation (“WC”) and Employer’s Liability (“EL”) policies is generally unlimited. See Tully Const. Co. v. Illinois Nat. Ins. Co., 131 A.D.3d 598 (2d Dept. 2015); Oneida Ltd. v. Utica Mut. Ins. Co., 263 A.D.2d 825, 694 N.Y.S.2d 221 (3d Dept. 1999). However, there is case holding that EL coverage may be limited in certain instances, such as when the primary EL carrier is listed as scheduled underlying insurance on an excess policy. In Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Ins. Co. of State of Pennsylvania, 43 A.D.3d 666, 841 N.Y.S.2d 288 (1st Dept. 2007), an employee of General Industrial Service Corporation (“General”), a subcontractor on a construction project, sought to recover under New York’s Labor Law against the project’s owner and construction manager. Those defendants, in turn, brought a third-party action for indemnification against General. The employee’s personal injury claim was ultimately settled for $2.5 million. After the settlement, the excess insurer, Liberty, filed suit against the primary employer’s liability insurers, The Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania and American International Group of Companies (collectively, “AIG”), which had refused to participate in the defense or settlement of the underlying personal injury litigation. Although the issue of whether the plaintiff in the underling action had sustained a “grave injury” (necessary to support the common law indemnity claim against General and trigger coverage under the Employer’s Lability policy) had not yet been determined, the court held that “[i]n the event the existence of a grave injury is proven, AIG’s liability will be limited to $1 million.” Reprinted courtesy of Robert S. Nobel, Traub Lieberman and Craig Rokuson, Traub Lieberman Mr. Nobel may be contacted at rnobel@tlsslaw.com Mr. Rokuson may be contacted at crokuson@tlsslaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The 2021 Top 50 Construction Law Firms™

    June 14, 2021 —
    Vaccination rates continue to rise, mandates are loosening for returning to work and school, and a $2 trillion infrastructure bill is looming on the horizon, but contractors remain cautious and counseled by the legal experts who thrive in the complex field of construction law. According to the latest report by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, construction employment numbers did not move much in April despite an increased demand for housing and a recovering economy. Due to continued fallout from the pandemic—and what seems like no end in sight for the rising costs of materials—contractors have been turning to construction law firms to navigate delayed projects, interpret contract language, assist in risk mitigation and ensure the road ahead is paved with understandable and protective clauses. For the 2021 survey for the annual U.S. ranking of The Top 50 Construction Law Firms™, Construction Executive’s editorial team reached out to dozens of attorneys at the nation’s best construction law firms to learn how the legal landscape is changing, as well as how legal teams are aiding clients with sharpening contract language and pivoting in response to challenges in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Reprinted courtesy of Cybele Tamulonis, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Energy Company Covered for Business Interruption Losses Caused by Fire and Resulting in Town-Ordered Shutdown

    February 15, 2021 —
    In the case of NextSun Energy Littleton, LLC v. Acadia Ins. Co., the United States District Court of Massachusetts held that once direct physical damage from a covered peril causes a covered business interruption loss, any increase in the duration of such business interruption, due to the enforcement of an ordinance or law, extends the coverage period provided for lost income. The Court further held that a policy exclusion for business interruption due to the enforcement of any ordinance or law not in force at the time of the loss only applies when the ordinance or law itself, not the enforcement action that it authorizes, was not in force at the time of the loss. The case involved a solar panel company, NextSun Energy Littleton (NextSun), that operated solar panel arrays providing electricity to the town of Littleton, Massachusetts. Due to a fire, 88 of the solar panels were damaged, and the Town immediately issued a “red-tag” order halting all energy-generating activity pending a safety inspection. The plaintiff purchased insurance for its panels along with “Energy Generating Income” (EGI) coverage, from the defendant, Acadia Ins. Co. (Acadia). The EGI policy covered “direct physical loss or damage” to “renewable energy generating equipment” and also covered the actual loss of surplus power income incurred during the interruption period. However, it excluded interruption of energy-generating income “caused by the enforcement of any ordinance, law, or decree … not in force at the time of loss.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David G. Jordan, Saxe Doernberger & Vita
    Mr. Jordan may be contacted at DJordan@sdvlaw.com

    Replacing Coal Plants with Renewables Is Cheaper 80% of the Time

    May 31, 2021 —
    About 80% of U.S. coal plants are now more expensive to keep running than to swap out for new wind and solar capacity, according to a report from Energy Innovation, a non-partisan climate and energy think tank. While renewables cost more than fossil energy for much of the last century, prices for new wind and solar have dropped so quickly in recent years that they were already cheaper than new coal. This report shows that the price differential holds true for a growing amount of existing coal, as well. “This is becoming true for more and more plants moving forward—and at an accelerating pace,” said Eric Gimon, a senior fellow with Energy Innovation and a co-author of the report. Coal has been steadily declining as a fixture of the U.S. energy mix for more than a decade due to combined pressure from activists and market forces. The Sierra Club, which runs the Beyond Coal campaign aimed at eliminating coal power in the U.S., says that 339 plants have either been retired or are on their way to retirement since 2010, leaving just 191 still operating indefinitely. (Michael R. Bloomberg, the founder and majority owner of Bloomberg LP, the parent company of Bloomberg News, has committed $500 million to launch Beyond Carbon, a campaign aimed at closing the remaining coal-powered plants in the U.S. by 2030 and slowing the construction of new gas plants.) Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Leslie Kaufman, Bloomberg

    Accessibility Considerations – What Your Company Should Be Aware of in 2021

    May 03, 2021 —
    Accessibility claims increased significantly in 2020, with this specific type of ADA-related case increasing by 23% from 2019 to 2020.1 This includes cases filed in federal court and those filed in California state court under the Unruh Act - with a direct reference to violation of the ADA.2 In California alone, a total of 989 cases were filed in 2020, representing almost 30% of all accessibility cases filed in the United States.3 These claims go beyond the traditional complaints related to a website maintained by an organization. While desktop websites dominate the overall number of lawsuit claims nationally, mobile apps continue to get significant attention along with a new trend in video content related claims. These video claims demand that all video have closed captions and audio descriptions.4 The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has created a surge in the reliance on websites and other platforms to accommodate working from home, online learning, as well as ordering groceries, food or other items online in an effort to stay home and safe. However, along with this substantial increase in demand, many users who rely on accessibility features have found many websites and related mobile applications to be inaccessible for their needs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Heather H. Whitehead, Newmeyer Dillion
    Ms. Whitehead may be contacted at heather.whitehead@ndlf.com

    Flint Water Crisis and America’s Clean Water Access Failings

    June 28, 2021 —
    Growing up on a Navajo reservation in Arizona, Jay Yazzie, now a senior environmental engineer at Brown and Caldwell, did not have running water in his home. To get its water supply, the family would take a 55-gallon drum to a livestock well or to a distribution point to obtain potable water for everyday use. He was 10 when his family was finally hooked up to a reliable supply. Reprinted courtesy of Pam Radtke Russell, Engineering News-Record Ms. Russell may be contacted at Russellp@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    How to Protect a Construction-Related Invention

    May 10, 2021 —
    They say necessity is mother of invention. That was surely true for Johan Vaaler, who in 1899 decided he was tired of having to sew pages together to keep them organized. Voila, enter the paper clip. This wasn’t the case for Percy Spencer. He was a radar tube designer working at Raytheon who, while working in front of an active radar set, noticed the candy bar in his pocket started to melt. Exploring the phenomenon further, he placed corn kernels in front of the radar and behold, he ended up with the world’s first microwaved popcorn. He patented the microwave oven in 1945. Whether by necessity or by accident, what should contractors do if they develop a unique tool to accomplish some portion of their work faster, easier or less expensively? How do they protect it from misappropriation by competitors, or by an errant employee? We are all familiar with the fact that in today’s internet-driven market, it has become very easy to reverse engineer and knock off an innovative product. The best way to safeguard an invention is, of course, to register it with the appropriate government agency:the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Generally done with the assistance of a patent lawyer, the process is neither inexpensive or abbreviated. It could cost several thousand dollars and take 12 to 18 months. But, more importantly, this is not sufficient. Inventors must regularly monitor their patents to police possible infringers. Many folks think the USPTO does this, but it does not. Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Barthet, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Barthet may be contacted at pbarthet@barthet.com