BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut tract home expert witness Fairfield Connecticut Medical building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut condominium expert witness Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut institutional building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up expert witness Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut office building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut retail construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut industrial building expert witness Fairfield Connecticut custom homes expert witness Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut custom home expert witness Fairfield Connecticut casino resort expert witness Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction expert witness Fairfield Connecticut condominiums expert witness Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking expert witness Fairfield Connecticut production housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut housing expert witness Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction 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


    The Leaning Tower of San Francisco

    Construction Contract’s Scope of Work Should Be Written With Clarity

    Several Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in Sacramento Magazine 2022 Top Lawyers!

    Intel's $20B Ohio 'Mega-Site' is Latest Development in Chip Makers' Rush to Boost US Production

    Vacation during a Project? Time for your Construction Documents to Shine!

    Virginia General Assembly Helps Construction Contractors

    VOSH Jumps Into the Employee Misclassification Pool

    Contractors and Force Majeure: Contractual Protection from Hurricanes and Severe Weather

    California Expands on Scope of Coverage for Soft Cost Claims

    House Passes $25B Water Resources Development Bill

    New Standard Addresses Wind Turbine Construction Safety Requirements and Identifies Hazards

    PA Superior Court Provides Clarification on Definition of CGL “Occurrence” When Property Damage Is Caused by Faulty Building Conditions

    One World Trade Center Due to Be America’s Tallest and World’s Priciest

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

    Rhode Island Affirms The Principle That Sureties Must be Provided Notice of Default Before They Can be Held Liable for Principal’s Default

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (06/28/23) – Combating Homelessness, U.S. Public Transportation Costs and the Future of Commercial Real Estate

    Equipment Costs? It’s a Steal!

    TLSS Partner Burks Smith and Associate Katie Keller Win Summary Judgment on Late Reported Water Seepage Case in South Florida

    Clean Energy and Conservation Collide in California Coastal Waters

    Beware of Design Pitfalls In Unfamiliar Territory

    AAA Revises Construction Industry Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures

    Mexico's Richest Man Carlos Slim to Rebuild Collapsed Subway Line

    Is It Time to Revisit Construction Defects in Kentucky?

    South Carolina “occurrence” and allocation

    Barratt Said to Suspend Staff as Contract Probe Continues

    EEOC Chair Issues New Report “Building for the Future: Advancing Equal Employment Opportunity in the Construction Industry”

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Just Hanging Around”

    Court Holds That Trimming of Neighbor’s Trees is Not an Insured Accident or Occurrence

    Is it the Dawning of the Age of Strict Products Liability for Contractors in California?

    The COVID-19 Impact: Navigating the Legal Landscape’s New Normal

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

    Manhattan Site for Supertall Condo Finds New Owner at Auction

    Arizona Supreme Court Leaves Limits on Construction Defects Unclear

    Construction Defect Reform Bill Passes Colorado Senate

    Arizona Supreme Court Confirms a Prevailing Homeowner Can Recover Fees on Implied Warranty Claims

    State Supreme Court Cases Highlight Importance of Wording in Earth Movement Exclusions

    Recent Developments Involving Cedell v. Farmers Insurance Company of Washington

    What to Expect From the New Self-Retracting Devices Standard

    Court Rules that Damage From Squatter’s Fire is Not Excluded as Vandalism or Malicious Mischief

    Scientists Are Trying to Make California Forests More Fire Resilient

    Wendel Rosen Construction Attorneys Recognized by Super Lawyers and Best Lawyers

    PulteGroup Fires Exec Accused of Defamation By Founder’s Heir

    Seattle Independent Contractor Ordinance – Pitfalls for Unwary Construction Professionals

    Viewpoint: Firms Should Begin to Analyze Lessons Learned in 2020

    Scott Saylin Expands Employment Litigation and Insurance Litigation Team at Payne & Fears

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “A Close Call?”

    Canada to Ban Foreigners From Buying Homes as Prices Soar

    Homeowner’s Policy Excludes Coverage for Loss Caused by Chinese Drywall

    Compliance Doesn’t Pay: Compliance Evidence Inadmissible in Strict Liability Actions

    April Rise in Construction Spending Not That Much
    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

    Colorado Nearly Triples Damages Caps for Cases Filed in 2025, Allows Siblings to File Wrongful Death Claims

    July 22, 2024 —
    Denver, Colo. (June 13, 2024) - On June 3, 2024, Colorado Governor Jared Polis signed HB24-1472 to increase the damages caps for personal injury and wrongful death claims. The law nearly triples the amounts available to plaintiffs, which will continue to increase for inflationary adjustments beginning in 2028 and every two years thereafter. These new damages caps affect not only claims that accrue in 2025 and beyond, but they also change the caps for any civil cases filed on or after January 1, 2025. This law was enacted as a compromise to a ballot measure that would have removed any cap on damages. The new caps are as follows:
    • The cap on noneconomic damages for personal injuries will be $1.5 million.
    • The cap on noneconomic damages for wrongful death will be $2.125 million.
    Plaintiffs are likely to delay filing new actions through the rest of 2024 as long as they are not up against a statute of limitations deadline. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Amy Johnson, Lewis Brisbois
    Ms. Johnson may be contacted at Amy.Johnson@lewisbrisbois.com

    What You Need to Know to Protect the Project Against Defect Claims

    October 28, 2024 —
    If a property owner claims there is a construction defect, that not only brings the project’s integrity into question but also your business’s reputation. So, how can you take steps to prevent these claims from causing such damage? Here are three things to know before beginning a project to effectively protect it and manage construction defect claims. 1. Documentation is key California and Los Angeles County require certain permits and documents in order for a construction project to move forward. Los Angeles County will also conduct plan checks to ensure everything is up to code. Detailed documentation will be important while making your plans. However, keeping notes throughout every step of the project will also be essential. Documenting all aspects of the project helps you:
    • Stay updated and aware of the project’s progress
    • Proactively catch and handle issues that could result in disputes
    • Create a record of evidence that can help manage defect claims
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Scott L. Baker, Baker & Associates
    Mr. Baker may be contacted at slb@bakerslaw.com

    San Francisco Office Secures Defense Verdict in Legal Malpractice Action

    November 25, 2024 —
    San Francisco, Calif. (October 31, 2024) - After a ten-day jury trial in San Francisco Superior Court, Partner Alex Graft recently secured a defense verdict in a legal malpractice action arising out of underlying litigation with the claimants’ homeowners association. The claimants alleged his client attorneys negligently advised them that the terms of the settlement agreement would result in the creation of a so-called independent board of directors for the homeowners association. It did not come to fruition. After the attorneys withdrew, they sued for their outstanding fees, which elicited a cross-complaint alleging malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract and negligent misrepresentation. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Definitions Matter in Illinois: Tenant Held Liable Only for Damage to Apartment Unit

    September 09, 2024 —
    In Phila. Indem. Ins. Co. v. Gonzalez, No. 1-23-0833, 2024 Ill. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1372, the Appellate Court of Illinois considered whether the terms of a lease agreement limited a tenant’s liability for fire damages, a fire caused by her negligence, to her apartment unit only. The plaintiff insured the subject apartment building, which incurred damage to several units as result of a fire in the tenant’s unit. The lease defined “Premises” as the specific apartment unit occupied by the tenant and held the tenant responsible for damage caused to the Premises. While the court found that the lease permitted the plaintiff to subrogate against the tenant, it held that the lease terms limited the damages to the tenant’s apartment unit only. In Gonzalez, the plaintiff’s insured owned a multi-unit apartment building in Chicago. In September 2019, the building owner entered into a lease agreement with the defendant for apartment Unit 601. The lease stated that Unit 601 was the “Leased Address (Premises).” Another provision stated that building owner “hereby leases to Tenant(s) and Tenant(s) hereby leases from Landlord(s) for use as a private dwelling only, the Premises, together with the fixtures and appliances (if any) in the premises…” The lease also stated that “Tenant shall be liable for any damage done to the premises as a result of Tenant’s or Tenant’s invitees, guests or others authorized to reside in the Premises [sic] direct action, negligence, or failure to inform Landlord of repairs necessary to prevent damage to the Premises.” Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com

    What Every Project Participant Needs to Know About Delay Claims

    August 05, 2024 —
    A “delay” on a construction project is defined as the stretching out of the time for completion of certain key milestone scopes of work which can impact the completion date of an entire project, due to some circumstances or events that were not reasonably anticipated when the project began. 2 Construction Law ¶ 6.01 (Matthew Bender, 2024). While delays can be caused by any number of events, the most common are defective plans and specifications; design changes; severe weather and other, similar unforeseeable events; unforeseen or differing site conditions; unavailability of materials or labor; labor inefficiencies or stoppages; contractor negligence; and owner influences, including construction changes or outright interference by the owner or its agents. If the project schedule is not recovered following a delay, then the project schedule will likely be extended, resulting in an increase in the contractor’s costs of performance. A contractor that has experienced a delay on a project can take certain actions to pursue recovery of any damages the contractor may have incurred. However, to do so it is important to understand the different types of delays and the methods for establishing the delays. I. Types of Delays Delays may be categorized as (1) critical versus non-critical delays, (2) excusable versus non-excusable delays, and (3) compensable versus non-compensable delays. A critical delay is a delay that affects the project completion date and delays the entire project. In essence, a critical delay is one that will extend the critical path of a project. A non-critical delay is a delay that has no effect on the project’s critical path. Courts have recognized that delays to work not on the critical path will generally not delay the completion of a project. G.M. Shupe, Inc. v U.S., 5 Cl. Ct. 662, 728 (1984). Such a non-critical delay may affect the completion of certain activities, but does not affect the completion date of the entire project. In order for a delay to provide the basis for a claim for additional time or money, the delay must impact critical path activities on the project schedule. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Andrew G. Vicknair, D'Arcy Vicknair, LLC
    Mr. Vicknair may be contacted at agv@darcyvicknair.com

    Construction and AI: What Contractors Need to Know from ABC’s New Report

    November 05, 2024 —
    The Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC) has just released its fourth annual construction technology report, which dives deep into AI’s evolving role in the construction industry. “ABC contractor members and the overall contracting community want more information on AI and how it can help them improve safety, quality and profitability—and win more work,” said Matt Abeles, ABC vice president of construction technology and innovation. The newly released ABC AI Tech Report delivers on this need, highlighting AI-driven case studies, resources, and thought leadership from ABC’s Tech Alliance. Understanding AI’s Role in Construction The report provides a comprehensive AI Resource Guide, breaking down the basics of artificial intelligence and how it applies to construction. Understanding AI is key for contractors to stay competitive in the rapidly changing industry. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Challenging a Termination for Default

    September 23, 2024 —
    No contractor wants to be terminated for default. It is the harshest contractual recourse. It is a recourse that has implications, particularly in the public sector. However, a party needs to be in a position to support the basis of the termination for default, and the terminated party, in most instances, should not be in a position to imply accept the basis of the default. This applies regardless of the project. In the federal context: “When a contractor challenges a default termination, the government bears the burden of establishing the validity of the termination.” Sergent’s Mechanical Systems, Inc. v. U.S., 2024 WL 4048175, *7 (Fed.Cl. 2024) (internal quotation and citation omitted). Once the government establishes the default, “the contractor bears the burden of establishing that the default was excused by fault of the government.” Id. at *8 (internal quotation and citation omitted). Relevant considerations as to whether the contractor is in default include the contractor’s failure to meet contract specifications or the required schedule. Sergent’s Mechanical Systems, supra, at *8. “[T]here is ‘a requirement that the contractor give reasonable assurances of performance in response to a validly issued cure notice.” Id. (internal quotation and citation omitted). Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    First Circuit Finds No Coverage For Subcontracted Faulty Work

    December 17, 2024 —
    After almost two years' deliberation, the First Circuit last week issued its long-awaited decision in Admiral Ins. Co. v. Tocci Bldg. Corp.[1]: affirming on other grounds, and leaving in place a district court decision that found subcontracted faulty work was not an "occurrence" and did not lead to covered “property damage” under Massachusetts law. The decision leaves Massachusetts among a number of states where general contractors should not expect coverage from their commercial general liability (CGL) insurers for damage falling within the contractor’s scope of work. Since the "scope of work" – where general contractors are involved – often encompasses an entire project, contractors who want coverage in Massachusetts should take care to make alternative arrangements: transferring risk to subcontractors through indemnity provisions and additional-insured endorsements, or relying on other policy forms where available. Reprinted courtesy of Eric Hermanson, White and Williams LLP and Austin Moody, White and Williams LLP Mr. Hermanson may be contacted at hermansone@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Moody may be contacted at moodya@whiteandwilliams.com Read the full story...