BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking expert witness Fairfield Connecticut parking structure expert witness Fairfield Connecticut office building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up expert witness Fairfield Connecticut industrial building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut production housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut institutional building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut Medical building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut custom home expert witness Fairfield Connecticut condominiums expert witness Fairfield Connecticut retail construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut tract home expert witness Fairfield Connecticut casino resort expert witness Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut condominium expert witness Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractor
    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


    Los Angeles Considering Census of Seismically Unstable Buildings

    "My Bad, I Thought It Was in Good Faith" is Not Good Enough - Contractor Ordered to Pay Prompt Payment Penalties

    No One to Go After for Construction Defects at Animal Shelter

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

    Continuous Injury Trigger Applied to Property Loss

    Bremer Whyte Congratulates Nicole Nuzzo on OCBA Professionalism and Ethics Committee Appointment

    Florida Construction Defect Decision Part of Lengthy Evolution

    London Penthouse Will Offer Chance to Look Down at Royalty

    Arizona – New Discovery Rules

    What To Do When the Government is Slow to Decide a Claim?

    New Notary Language For Mechanics Lien Releases and Stop Payment Notice Releases

    Attorney's Erroneous Conclusion that Limitations Period Had Not Expired Was Not Grounds For Relief Under C.C.P. § 473(b)

    Misread of Other Insurance Clause Becomes Costly for Insurer

    CSLB Joint Venture Licenses – Providing Contractors With The Means To Expand Their Businesses

    When is a Contract not a Contract?

    ICC/ASHRAE/USGBC/IES Green Model Code Integrates Existing Standards

    New York Court of Appeals Addresses Choice of Law Challenges

    Tropical Storms Pile Up Back-to-Back-to-Back Out West

    Insured's Expert Qualified, Judgment for Coverage Affirmed

    ETF Bulls Bet Spring Will Thaw the U.S. Housing Market

    California Posts Nation’s Largest Gain in Construction Jobs

    PATH Station Designed by Architect Known for Beautiful Structures, Defects, and Cost Overruns

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

    Mich. AG Says Straits of Mackinac Tunnel Deal Unconstitutional

    Duty to Defend Negligent Misrepresentation Claim

    Digital Twins for a Safer Built Environment

    Don’t Waive Your Right to Arbitrate (Unless You Want To!)

    Enforceability Of Subcontract “Pay-When-Paid” Provisions – An Important Update

    South Carolina Supreme Court Finds that Consequential Damage Arise From "Occurrence"

    West Coast Casualty’s Construction Defect Seminar Returns to Anaheim May 15th & 16th

    Remediation Work Caused by Installation of Defective Tiles Not Covered

    Paycheck Protection Flexibility Act Of 2020: What You Need to Know

    Thousands of London Residents Evacuated due to Fire Hazards

    DE Confirms Robust D&O Protection Despite Company Demise

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

    Contractors Can No Longer Make Roof Repairs Following Their Own Inspections

    Texas Supreme Court Holds that Invoking Appraisal Provision and Paying Appraisal Amount Does Not Insulate an Insurer from Damages Under the Texas Prompt Payment of Claims Act

    Because I Haven’t Mentioned Mediation Lately. . .

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

    July 1, 2015 Statutory Changes Affecting Virginia Contractors and Subcontractors

    Civility Is Key in Construction Defect Mediation

    Insurance Company Prevails in “Chinese Drywall” Case

    Third Circuit Court of Appeals Concludes “Soup to Nuts” Policy Does Not Include Faulty Workmanship Coverage

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Increased 5% in Year to June

    Connecticut Court Finds Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Enforceable

    Park Avenue Is About to Get Something It Hasn’t Seen in 40 Years

    Sales of U.S. New Homes Decline After Record May Revision

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

    “Rip and Tear” Damage Remains Covered Under CGL Policy as “Accident”—for Now.

    Iconic Seattle Center Arena Roof the Only Piece to Stay in $900-Million Rebuild
    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. Leveraging 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

    Formal Opinion No. 2020-203: How A Lawyer Is to Handle Access to Client Confidential Information and Anticipation of Potential Security Issues

    December 07, 2020 —
    Recently, the California Bar Association (“CBA”) published Formal Opinion No. 2020-203[1] concerning a lawyer’s ethical obligations with respect to unauthorized access to electronically stored client information. The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic greatly accelerated the growing trend of storing and maintaining data and information online so that employees and clients can access the data from anywhere in the world at any time. Now, in today’s working world, the reality is nearly all information and data is stored and shared digitally online for ease of access, use, and dissemination. Unfortunately, a major draw-back of this switch to a cyber paradigm is serious exposure to data breaches as a result of hacking, inadvertence, or theft. Formal Opinion No. 2020-203 outlines how a lawyer is to handle access to client confidential information and anticipation of potential security issues. This article will briefly cover the key aspects addressed in Formal Opinion No. 2020-203. What is the duty owed by a lawyer to his or her client regarding the use of technology? At the outset, the CBA reminds lawyers of the ongoing duty of competence (Rule 1.1) and the duty to safeguard clients’ confidences and secrets (Rule 1.6; Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code, § 6068(e)) which impose the requirement that a lawyer must have a basic understanding of the risks posed when using a given technology and (if necessary) obtain help from appropriate experts to assess those risks and take reasonable steps to prevent data breaches. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Risk Protection: Force Majeure Agreements Take on Renewed Relevance

    November 30, 2020 —
    Force majeure clauses have been standard in contracts dating back hundreds of years in the United States—and even longer in Europe. “Force majeure,” which is French for “greater force,” removes liability for unforeseen events that prevent parties from fulfilling contractual obligations. In a year defined by the COVID-19 pandemic, these clauses have gone from boilerplate basics to something worthy of further examination and attention in order to minimize risk for all parties involved in a construction project. Prior to COVID-19, drafters might have considered a localized or regional event that would lead to invoking a force majeure clause. It is doubtful, however, that anybody envisioned the impact on such a world-wide scale. UNDERSTANDING THE AGREEMENTS Force majeure clauses cover unforeseen events, a broad term that encompasses both acts of God and human-caused incidents. These range from natural disasters like earthquakes and hurricanes to acts of terrorism, strikes, political strife, government actions, war and other difficult- or impossible-to-predict disruptions. When such an event occurs, the force majeure clause attempts to remove, or at least reduce, uncertainty as to the rights and liabilities of the parties to the agreement. Reprinted courtesy of Michael E. Carson, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Carson may be contacted at michael.carson@nationwide.com

    Engineering, Architecture, and Modern Technology – An Interview with Dr. Jakob Strømann-Andersen

    September 14, 2020 —
    We sat down with Dr. Jakob Strømann-Andersen of Henning Larsen’s Sustainability Engineering Department. Our talk covered the need for interdisciplinary research, sustainable practice, and how technology will lead change in the years ahead. Can you tell us a bit about your professional background and what you’re currently working on? I’m a partner with Henning Larsen and work with around 300 architects globally. We’re based in Copenhagen where we’re 200 people strong, with branches throughout the world. I’m a trained engineer with a civil engineering background – making me the first partner that’s not an architect. I’ve been with the company for 15 years and joined as an industrial research Ph.D. in Denmark. For my first three years here, I was employed as a researcher doing research and energy-efficient building design. And that’s where we started with our approach to sustainability. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Fifth Circuit Holds Insurer Owes Duty to Defend Latent Condition Claim That Caused Fire Damage to Property Years After Construction Work

    September 21, 2020 —
    Most general liability policies only provide coverage for “property damage” that occurs during the policy period. Thus, when analyzing coverage for a construction defect claim, it is important to ascertain the date on which damage occurred. Of course, the plaintiffs’ bar crafts pleadings to be purposefully vague as to the date (or period) of damage to property. A recent Fifth Circuit decision applying Texas law addresses this coverage issue in the context of allegations of a condition created by an insured during the policy period that caused damage after the policy expired. In Gonzalez v. Mid-Continent Cas. Co., 969 F.3d 554 (5th Cir. 2020), Gilbert Gonzales (the insured) was a siding contractor. In 2013, the underlying plaintiff hired Gonzales to install new siding on his house. In 2016, the underlying plaintiff’s house was damaged in a fire. The underlying plaintiff sued Gilbert in Texas state court alleging that when Gonzalez installed the siding in 2013, he hammered nails through electrical wiring and created a dangerous condition that caused a fire three years later in 2016. At the time Gilbert performed construction work, he was insured by Mid-Continent Casualty Company. Mid-Continent disclaimed coverage to Gonzales on the basis that the complaint unequivocally alleged that property was damaged in 2016 and there were no allegations that property damage occurred prior to 2016 or was continuing in nature. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeremy S. Macklin, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Macklin may be contacted at jmacklin@tlsslaw.com

    Hurricane Laura: Implications for Insurers in Louisiana

    October 19, 2020 —
    Just two days before the 15th Anniversary of Hurricane Katrina, Category 4 Hurricane Laura made landfall near Cameron, Louisiana. Although the “unsurvivable” 20-foot storm surge, which had been predicted ahead of the storm, thankfully was significantly less, the impact of Laura on the Southwest Coast of Louisiana and Southeast Coast of Texas and its neighboring parishes and counties, most notably Cameron Parish, was quite severe. Lake Charles, Louisiana suffered widespread flooding and sustained catastrophic wind damage. Although the storm moved quickly, it retained its strength longer than expected such that even areas well inland sustained considerable damage. Preliminary estimates for insured losses from storm surge, flooding, and winds range from $8 to $12 billion for residential and commercial properties. Insurers providing residential or commercial property insurance in Louisiana should keep the following statutory claims handling requirements in mind. Louisiana Statutory Provisions Under Louisiana law, an insurer is expected to comply with certain statutory requirements in investigating and handling claims submitted by its insureds and third-party claimants. The majority of these requirements, and the consequences of their violation, are codified by La. R.S. 22:1892, which governs the payment and adjustment of claims, and La. R.S. 22:1973, which delineates an insurer’s duty of good faith. Together, the statutes impose three requirements on insurers: timely initiation of loss adjustment, timely payment of claims, and a duty of good faith and fairness in the adjustment and payment of said claims. Reprinted courtesy of Jennifer Michel, Lewis Brisbois and Tabitha Durbin, Lewis Brisbois Ms. Michel may be contacted at Jenny.Michel@lewisbrisbois.com Ms. Durbin may be contacted at Tabitha.Durbin@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Arizona Is the No. 1 Merit Shop Construction State, According to ABC’s 2020 Scorecard

    February 15, 2021 —
    Associated Builders and Contractors released its 2020 Merit Shop Scorecard, an annual ranking based on state policies and programs that encourage workforce development, strengthen career and technical education, grow careers in construction, and promote fair and open competition for taxpayer-funded construction projects. Arizona topped the rankings for the first time this year based on the state’s promotion of free enterprise and investment in tomorrow’s construction workforce, a top priority for ABC. Georgia followed Arizona in second place this year, up from fifth in 2019. Florida, a year-to-year high performer, remained in the top five after two years in the top rank in 2018 and 2019. “A foundational pillar of ABC is building the next generation of craft professionals, and the top states in this year’s rankings lead the country in workforce development policies,” said Ben Brubeck, ABC’s vice president of regulatory, labor and state affairs. “The merit shop contractor can flourish in free enterprise environments created in states like Arizona and Florida, which has positive ripple effects on a state’s overall economic growth.” Reprinted courtesy of ABC, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Texas Federal District Court Dismisses COVID-19 Claim

    October 25, 2020 —
    Judge Ezra, formerly on the bench in Hawaii, dismissed a COVID-19 claim pursued by a Texas policy holder. Diesel Barbershop, LLC v. State Farm Lloyds, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147276 (W.D. Texas Aug. 13, 2020). Local and state officials in Texas issued shutdown orders in March 2020 due to the spread of the cornavirus. All non-essential businesses, including the insureds' barbershop businesses, were ordered closed from April 2, 2020 until April 30, 2020. The insureds submitted a claim for business interruption and civil authority coverage to their carrier, State Farm. The claim was denied based on the policy's exclusion for loss caused by enforcement of ordinance or law, virus, and consequential losses. For Civil Authority coverage, State Farm contended the policy required that there by physical damage within one mile of the described property and that the damage be the result of a Covered Cause of Loss, which, State Farm asserted, a virus was not. The insureds sued and State Farm moved to dismiss. The court noted cases in which courts had found physical loss even without tangible destruction to the covered property. Yet, the court found that the line of cases requiring tangible injury to property were more persuasive. Therefore, the court found that the insureds failed to plead a direct physical loss. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Recent Federal Court Decision Favors Class Action Defendants

    October 26, 2020 —
    The commercial construction contracting and subcontracting industry in general is unique under the law for industry professionals, as they’re typically limited to wage and hour litigation under provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The majority of FLSA cases seek class action status or collective classification, while other FLSA litigation is initiated by individuals seeking damages. For the former, past and current employees can opt into class action litigation and seek collective damages against a construction company. The looming financial burden of class action or collective litigation against construction companies consume time, money and resources to the extent it’s often advisable for Defendants to negotiate an unfair settlement. Yet, thanks to a recent federal court decision on March 27, 2020, the legal maneuvering behind unreasonable Plaintiff demands may soon be counter-balanced by the class action Defendants’ right to due process review. A recent legal opinion in a recent FLSA case has potentially wide-ranging implications for Defendant employers mired in future class action litigation. Moreover, as the FLSA applies to all employers, this decision potentially applies to all ownership groups representing the commercial construction industry, extending to partners, contractors and subcontractors. Reprinted courtesy of Amber Karns & Dan Pipitone, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Mr. Pipitone may be contacted at dpipitone@munsch.com Ms. Karns may be contacted at akarns@munsch.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of