BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut parking structure expert witness Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut casino resort expert witness Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut Medical building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut industrial building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut custom home expert witness Fairfield Connecticut production housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut custom homes expert witness Fairfield Connecticut condominium expert witness Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut retail construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut office building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking expert witness Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up expert witness Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window 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


    Feds Move To Indict NY Contractor Execs, Developer, Ex-Cuomo Aide

    Cherokee Nation Wins Summary Judgment in COVID-19 Business Interruption Claim

    Remote Depositions in the Post-Covid-19 World

    Review of Recent Contractors State License Board Changes

    CSLB Reminds California Public Works Contractors to Renew Their Public Works Registration

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (02/15/23) – Proptech Solutions, Supply Chain Pivots, and the Inflation Reduction Act

    Design, Legal and Accounting all Fight a War on Billable Hours After the Advent of AI

    Is the Obsession With Recordable Injury Rates a Deadly Safety Distraction?

    Saudi Prince’s Megacity Shows Signs of Life

    Ensuring Arbitration in Construction Defect Claims

    Overview of New Mexico Construction Law

    Another Reminder that Your Construction Contract Language Matters

    California Limits Indemnification Obligations of Design Professionals

    More Construction Defects for San Francisco’s Eastern Bay Bridge Expansion

    Wall Street’s Favorite Suburban Housing Bet Is Getting Crowded

    Capitol View-Corridor Restrictions Affect Massing of Austin’s Tallest Tower

    Construction Firm Sues City and Engineers over Reservoir Project

    Pool Contractor’s Assets Frozen over Construction Claims

    MTA Debarment Update

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s 2023 Mountain States Super Lawyers Rising Stars!

    Search in Florida Collapse to Take Weeks; Deaths Reach 90

    California Court of Appeal Holds That the Right to Repair Act Prohibits Class Actions Against Manufacturers of Products Completely Manufactured Offsite

    Prior Occurrence Exclusion Bars Coverage for Construction Defects

    New Index Tracking Mortgages for New Homes

    Insurers' Motion to Knock Out Bad Faith, Negligent Misrepresentation Claims in Construction Defect Case Denied

    Did the Building Boom Lead to a Boom in Construction Defects?

    Gillotti v. Stewart (2017) 2017 WL 1488711 Rejects Liberty Mutual, Holding Once Again that the Right to Repair Act is the Exclusive Remedy for Construction Defect Claims

    Toronto Skyscraper With $1.2 Billion of Debt Has Been Put in Receivership

    SB 939 Proposes Moratorium On Unlawful Detainer Actions For Commercial Tenants And Allows Tenants Who Can't Renegotiate Their Lease In Good Faith To Terminate Their Lease Without Liability

    A Sample Itinerary to get the Most out of West Coast Casualty’s Construction Defect Seminar

    Insurance Law Client Alert: California Appeals Court Refuses to Apply Professional Services Exclusion to Products-Completed Operations Loss

    Who Says You Can’t Choose between Liquidated Damages or Actual Damages?

    Florida SB 2022-736: Construction Defect Claims

    Buyers Are Flocking to NYC’s Suburbs. Too Bad There Aren’t Many Homes to Sell.

    Subcontractor Strength Will Drive Industry’s Ability to Meet Demand, Overcome Challenges

    Pile Test Likely for Settling Millennium Tower

    Index Demonstrates Increase in Builders’ Sentiment

    What You Should Know About Liquidated Damages and Liability Caps for Delay and Performance Liquidated Damages

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2023 New York – Metro Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars

    Replacement of Defective Gym Construction Exceeds Original Cost

    Time is Money. Unless You’re an Insurance Company

    Design & Construction Case Expands Florida’s Slavin Doctrine

    Insurer Prevails on Summary Judgment for Bad Faith Claim

    Additional Insured Is Covered Under On-Going Operations Endorsement Despite Subcontractor's Completion of Work

    Court Strikes Down Reasonable Construction Defect Settlement

    HHMR Celebrates 20 Years of Service!

    Construction Contracts Need Amending Post COVID-19 Shutdowns

    Colorado House Bill 19-1170: Undefined Levels of Mold or Dampness Can Make a Leased Residential Premises Uninhabitable

    Florida Courts Inundated by Wave of New Lawsuits as Sweeping Tort Reform Appears Imminent

    The Biggest Trials Coming to Courts Around the World in 2021
    ve Burned Others with Ensuing Lawsuit
    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

    Best Lawyers Honors Hundreds of Lewis Brisbois Attorneys, Names Four Partners ‘Lawyers of the Year’

    September 16, 2024 —
    (August 15, 2024) - Best Lawyers has selected 171 Lewis Brisbois attorneys across 47 offices for its 31st edition of The Best Lawyers in America. It has also recognized four Lewis Brisbois partners on its "Lawyers of the Year" list: San Diego Partner Gary K. Brucker Jr. (Litigation - Real Estate); Weirton Managing Partner Michelle L. Gorman (Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions - Defendants); Roanoke Partner Paul C. Kuhnel (Medical Malpractice Law - Defendants); and Los Angeles Co-Administrative Partner Steven R. Lewis (Product Liability Litigation - Defendants). Please join us in congratulating the following attorneys on their Best Lawyers recognition! You can see the full list of attorneys named to Best Lawyers' Ones to Watch in America here. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Additional Insured Not Entitled to Coverage for Named Insured's Defective Work

    September 02, 2024 —
    The Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit determined there was no duty to defend or to indemnify the additional insured for the named insured's defective work. St. Paul Guardian Ins. Co., et al. v. Walsh Construction Co., 99 F. 4th 1035 (7th Cir. 2024). The City of Chicago contracted with Walsh Construction Company to manage the construction of a canopy and curtain wall system at O'Hare International Airport. Walsh entered into a contract with Carlo Steel Corporation, which in turn subcontracted with LB Steel, LLC to fabricate and install steel columns to support the wall and canopy. LB Steel listed Walsh as an additional insured in its commercial general liability policies. LB Steel's insurers were St. Paul, Travelers, and Charter Oak Fire Insurance Company. Several years into the project, the City discovered cracks in the welds of the steel columns and sued Walsh. Walsh, in turn, sued LB Steel under its subcontract. Walsh also asked LB Steel's insurers to defend it in the City's lawsuit, but they refused to do so. Walsh eventually secured a judgment against LB Steel, but LB Steel declared bankruptcy. Walsh then sued LB Steel's insurers to recover the costs of defending against the City's lawsuit and indemnification for any resulting losses. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Seattle Developer Defaults on Renovated Office Buildings

    December 23, 2024 —
    A major developer in downtown Seattle defaulted on a loan backed by two of its most prized office properties, including one that formerly housed a branch of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. Firms tied to Martin Selig Real Estate are in default on a more than $200 million loan, according to letters from lender Acore Capital dated Nov. 15 that were filed in Washington’s King County. The buildings would change ownership 30 days after that notice if no other action is taken, according to the letters. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anna Edgerton, Bloomberg

    2024 Update to CEB’s Mechanics Liens Now Available

    October 15, 2024 —
    For a number of years we have had the honor to serve as update authors for several publications of California’s Continuing Education of the Bar (CEB). I didn’t realize it until now but the CEB, a program of the University of California, was started more than 75 years ago following WWII to provide veterans who were attorneys with practical guidance on changes to the law as they returned to their practices following the war. Pretty cool! Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com Read the full story...

    Litigation Roundup: “You Can’t Make Me Pay!”

    August 19, 2024 —
    The foregoing is an accurate statement, generally speaking, for Louisiana public entities. Statutory and constitutional provisions in Louisiana protect public entities from being forced to pay monies – including satisfying court judgments – when the monies have not been specifically allocated for the purpose. Correspondingly, there is ordinarily no means to seize public assets to satisfy judgments. On the other hand, writs of mandamus in Louisiana – actions designed to compel a public official to undertake a ministerial duty over which the public official has no discretion – can be aimed at forcing a public official (on behalf of the public entity) to pay money. In an inverse condemnation case, plaintiffs prevailed on the theory that a Louisiana public entity had “damaged and interfered with their use and enjoyment of their private homes and church” during a New Orleans drainage project. The plaintiffs pursued a writ of mandamus to compel payment their approximately $1.5 million judgment for damages and fees as a “ministerial duty” of the public entity. To be sure, in connection with the judgment, the public entity had not at any time specifically allocated funds for the payment. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Lund III, Phelps
    Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com

    Flushing Away Liability: What the Aqua Engineering Case Means for Contractors and Subcontractors

    October 21, 2024 —
    The recent Town of Mancos v. Aqua Engineering case is an insightful example of how well written contracts and timely legal action can make all the difference in resolving disputes between municipalities, general contractors, and subcontractors. The ruling favored Aqua Engineering; a subcontractor that played a role in a wastewater treatment facility project gone wrong. The court’s decision highlighted key legal principles, including the economic loss rule and the importance of well-structured contracts in construction disputes. Whether you are a subcontractor looking to avoid undue liability or a general contractor seeking to ensure subcontractors shoulder their fair portion of responsibility, this case offers valuable lessons for all parties involved in construction projects. The Background: A Wastewater Project with Issues In 2008, the Town of Mancos, Colorado, hired Souder, Miller & Associates (“SMA”) to design a new wastewater treatment facility. SMA subcontracted Aqua Engineering to help implement a specific wastewater treatment system known as the Multi-Stage Activated Biological Process (“MSABP”). However, after construction, the facility never worked as expected. For years, the Town faced ongoing issues, and despite Aqua’s involvement in attempts to fix the problems, the facility remained dysfunctional. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC

    New York Appellate Team Obtains Affirmance of Dismissal of Would-Be Labor Law Action Against Municipal Entities

    August 12, 2024 —
    New York, N.Y. (July 11, 2024) - In Charlot v. City of New York, ___ A.D.3d ___, 2024 NY Slip Op 03161 (2d Dep’t 2024), New York Associate Dean Pillarella, a member of the Appellate Practice, recently obtained an affirmance of the lower court’s dismissal of the plaintiff’s action against the City of New York (“the City”) for failure to timely serve a notice of claim. New York Partner Meghan Cavalieri, a member of the Construction Practice, and her team authored and argued the initial motion to dismiss. The plaintiff alleged to have sustained injuries as a result of a construction-site accident on December 8, 2020, on City-owned property in the course of the construction of a school by the New York City School Construction Authority. N.Y. General Municipal Law (“GML”) § 50-e(1)(a), requires service of a notice of claim within 90 days after the claim arises as a condition precedent to the commencement of a tort action. The plaintiff served no notice of claim until June 2021 and commenced an action in January 2022, alleging violations of N.Y. Labor Law §§ 240(1), 241(6), and 200. Given the plaintiff’s failure to comply with GML § 50-e(1)(a), Meghan and her team rejected the notices of claim as untimely. The plaintiff then moved for leave to deem the notices of claim timely served nunc pro tunc. In response, Meghan and her team opposed the motion and cross-moved to dismiss the action. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    “For What It’s Worth”

    October 21, 2024 —
    The legal doctrine of quantum meruit is essentially referring to recovering “for what it’s worth,” incorporating the Latin phrase for “as much as one has deserved.” Quantum meruit recovery occurs when there is no contract between parties for the particular item for which recovery is sought. Hence, quantum meruit recovery is generally a means of last resort to endeavor to make oneself whole. So, it was for a subcontractor seeking nearly $14,000,000 for work it performed on a construction project in Portsmouth, New Hampshire. The subcontractor sued on contract as well as quantum meruit/unjust enrichment. The court initially dismissed the quantum meruit/unjust enrichment claims – because there was a contract claim – whereupon the contract claim was dismissed on summary judgment: the subcontractor failed to timely submit change proposals and, consequently, “lost contract remedies available to recover amounts it sought in the change proposals.” Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Lund III, Phelps
    Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com