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


    Insurer's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings for Construction Defect Claim Rejected

    When Construction Contracts Go Sideways in Bankruptcy

    'Right to Repair' and Fixing Equipment in a Digital Age

    When to use Arbitration to Resolve Construction Disputes

    Account for the Imposition of Material Tariffs in your Construction Contract

    New NEPA Rule Restores Added Infrastructure Project Scrutiny

    Kentucky Court Upholds Arbitration Award, Denies Appeal

    The Most Expensive Travel Construction Flops

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Burks Smith and Katie Keller Win Daubert Motion Excluding Plaintiff’s Expert’s Testimony in the Middle District of Florida

    No Indemnity Coverage Where Insured Suffers No Loss

    Las Vegas’ McCarran Tower Construction Issues Delays Opening

    Warning! Danger Ahead for Public Entities

    Has Hydrogen's Time Finally Come?

    An Insurance Policy Isn’t Ambiguous Just Because You Want It to Be

    Water Intrusion Judged Not Related to Construction

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

    A Relatively Small Exception to Fraud and Contract Don’t Mix

    Housing-Related Spending Made Up Significant Portion of GDP in Fourth Quarter 2013

    California Court of Appeal Clarifies Intent of Faulty Workmanship Exclusions

    Massachusetts High Court to Decide if Insurers Can Recoup Defense Costs

    Who Would Face Liability For Oroville Dam Management: Brett Moore Authors Law360 Article

    Fatal Boston Garage Demolition Leaves Long Road to Recovery

    Clearly Determining in Contract Who Determines Arbitrability of Dispute

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “The Jury Is Still Out”

    California Rejects Judgments By Confession Pursuant to Civil Code Section 1132

    Tips for Contractors Who Want to Help Rebuild After the California Wildfires

    Land a Cause of Home Building Shortage?

    No Rest for the Weary: Project Completion Is the Beginning of Litigation

    Lane Construction Sues JV Partner Skanska Over Orlando I-4 Project

    Revisiting Statutory Offers to Compromise

    New York Restrictions on Flow Through Provision in Subcontracts

    LAX Construction Defect Suit May Run into Statute of Limitations

    ‘Hallelujah,’ House Finally Approves $1T Infrastructure Funding Package

    How to Build a Water-Smart City

    2023 Construction Outlook: Construction Starts Expected to Flatten

    Evaluating Construction Trends From 2023 and Forecasting For 2024

    Massachusetts Roofer Killed in Nine-story Fall

    AB 3018: Amendments to the Skilled and Trained Workforce Requirements on California Public Projects

    Suing a Local Government in Land Use Cases – Part 1 – Substantive Due Process

    Contractor Removed from Site for Lack of Insurance

    EPA Announces that January 2017 Revised RMP Rules are Now Effective

    Accounting for Payments on Projects Became Even More Crucial This Year

    Insurance Policy Provides No Coverage For Slab Collapse in Vision One

    Greg Dillion & Newmeyer Dillion Named 2019 Good Scout Award Recipient

    New York Bridge to Be Largest Infrastructure Project in North America

    Illinois Attorney General Warns of Home Repair Scams

    Construction Defects and Second Buyers in Pennsylvania

    William Lyon Homes Unites with Polygon Northwest Company

    Update Coverage for Construction Defect Claims in Colorado

    South Carolina Couple Must Arbitrate Construction Defect Claim
    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

    Congratulations to San Diego Partner Alex Giannetto and Senior Associate Michael Ibach on Settling a Case 3 Weeks Into a 5-Week Trial!

    April 15, 2024 —
    Partner Alex Giannetto and Senior Associate Michael Ibach of BWB&O’s San Diego office started a trial in San Diego set to last at least five weeks. Plaintiffs alleged causes of action of negligence, trespass and nuisance against BWB&O’s client, arguing the owner/property manager did not properly handle alleged overwatering of the front yard, allegedly resulting in a landslide impacting 8 homes on a City slope in Carlsbad. Cross-Complainant City alleged independent negligence to fix the slope it owned and controlled as well as various indemnity-based causes of action against BWB&O’s client. Plaintiffs claimed over $24 million in damages, while Cross-Complainant placed sole blame for the incident on BWB&O’s client around $6 million. Heading into trial, it was made clear that neither Plaintiffs nor Cross-Complainant would accept anything less than 7-figures to settle BWB&O’s client out of the case. In the first week of trial, BWB&O was able to leverage motions in limine, opening statements, and cross-examinations to secure a dismissal of three of the four causes of action alleged by Plaintiff that were associated with pain & suffering. In the second week of trial, BWB&O secured a dismissal of Cross-Complainant’s negligence cause of action paving the way for a settlement with Plaintiffs. Leveraging the threat of a non-suit when Plaintiffs rested, BWB&O secured resolution of Plaintiffs’ complaint for a fraction of what had previously been sought. Finally, BWB&O was able to secure a dismissal of the remaining indemnity-based causes of action in the cross-complaint and fully extract the client from the matter. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Are Construction Contract Limitation of Liability Clauses on the Way Out in Virginia?

    March 11, 2024 —
    Remember BAE Systems and Fluor? This post is the third here at Construction Law Musings relating to this case which is a seemingly never-ending source for content. In the prior post discussing this case, the Court found that Va. Code 1-4.1:1 which bars waiver of a right to payment before work is performed did not apply because Fluor had provided work before execution of the contract or any change orders. In the most recent opinion in this long-running litigation, and after a motion to reconsider by Fluor that was granted, the Court re-examined this finding along with the contractual language found in the Limitation of Damages (LOD) clause and came to the opposite conclusion regarding certain change orders that remained unpaid by BAE. The Court first looked to the language of the contract itself and specifically the language in the LOD provision that states “Except as otherwise provided in this Subcontract.” The Court then looked at the change order provision and its typical equitable adjustment language and the mandatory nature of the equitable adjustment language. The Court found that the LOD provisions did not apply to change orders both because price increases due to change orders are not “damages” and because of the exception language in the LOD provision itself. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    The Three L’s of Real Estate Have New, Urgent Meaning

    April 15, 2024 —
    What will it take to make Americans stop rushing headlong into climate peril? Cheaper housing in safer places, for one thing. But maybe big red flags on property listings will help, too. Redfin Corp., the digital real estate company, last week added air-quality data to its listings as part of its “climate risks” feature, which aims to warn homebuyers of the chances their dream home could succumb to a global-warming nightmare. Using data from the climate research firm First Street Foundation, Redfin estimates a property’s current and predicted risk levels for flooding, wildfires, extreme heat, high winds — and now days when the Environmental Protection Agency’s Air Quality Index tops 100, a category known as “unhealthy for sensitive groups.” Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Mark Gongloff, Bloomberg

    Balancing Risk and Reward: The Complexities of Stadium Construction Projects

    April 15, 2024 —
    From grand designs to opening day, stadium construction projects present a captivating blend of high-profile opportunities and significant challenges and risks. Navigating this complex landscape is not easy, but when managed properly, the potential rewards, both in terms of reputation and finances, can make it a gamble worth taking. While each stadium project is different, some of the more common risks include:
    1. Securing adequate labor, materials and equipment based on the size of the project;
    2. Logistical concerns regarding the concurrent performance of multiple trade scopes on a single site;
    3. Protection of work in place from weather due to the large footprint of the stadium project;
    4. Cash flow issues caused by protracted change order processing, conflicting and/or onerous payment requirements from project financing entities, and reimbursement of considerable monthly general condition costs; and
    5. Meeting the schedule requirements for the project.
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gregory A. Eichorn, Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Mr. Eichorn may be contacted at geichorn@pecklaw.com

    AI-Powered Construction Optioneering Today

    April 08, 2024 —
    In this episode of the AEC Business Podcast, Aarni Heiskanen interviews René Morkos, the founder and CEO of ALICE Technologies. They discuss construction tech, AI, and ALICE Core, the company’s latest product launch. How the Construction Technology Landscape has Changed The construction tech industry has evolved significantly since 2015, as discussed with René. In 2015, there was a lack of understanding and reluctance toward construction tech, with some investors even hesitant to invest in the sector. However, by 2017-2018, there was a noticeable shift as construction tech became a sought-after investment opportunity. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Michael Baker Intl. Settles Federal Pay Bias Allegations

    February 26, 2024 —
    Michael Baker International Inc. agreed to pay $122,299 in back wages as part of an agreement with the U.S. Dept. of Labor to resolve allegations that the engineer-consultant paid women in four job titles less than their male counterparts. Reprinted courtesy of James Leggate, Engineering News-Record Mr. Leggate may be contacted at leggatej@enr.com Read the full story...

    DOI Aims to Modernize its “Inefficient and Inflexible” Type A Natural Resource Damages Assessment Regulations

    March 25, 2024 —
    The U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) published a proposed rule aimed at modernizing and streamlining the “Type A” Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) regulations under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the Clean Water Act (CWA). (The comment deadline was later extended.) The revisions, first previewed in a January 2023 Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR), are intended to fulfill “the original statutory purpose of providing a streamlined and simplified assessment process” with the overarching goal of facilitating settlements and expediting restoration efforts following injury resulting from pollution in a broader range of cases. The NRDA regulations provide two paths to assessing natural resource damages (NRD): (1) the more complex, site-specific Type B procedures for detailed NRDAs and (2) what is intended to be the standard, simplified Type A assessment procedures requiring minimal field observation. Particularly, the Type A process is reserved for two specific aquatic environments (coastal and marine areas or Great Lakes environments) when a relatively minor release of a single hazardous substance occurs, resulting in a smaller scale and scope of natural resource injury, and the rebuttal presumption for the Type A procedure is limited to damages of $100,000 or less under the current version of the rule. Reprinted courtesy of Amanda G. Halter, Pillsbury, Jillian Marullo, Pillsbury and Ashleigh Myers, Pillsbury Ms. Halter may be contacted at amanda.halter@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Marullo may be contacted at jillian.marullo@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Myers may be contacted at ashleigh.myers@pillsburylaw.com Read the full story...

    California Makes Big Changes to the Discovery Act

    March 04, 2024 —
    Beginning January of 2024, California amended the Civil Discovery Act to mirror the Federal Rules and require that any party appearing in a civil action to provide initial disclosures to any other party demanding the same. In January of 2024, California amended the Civil Discovery Act, specifically C.C.P. section 2016.090, to affirmatively require that any party appearing in a civil action to provide initial disclosures to any other party demanding the same. In an effort to reflect the Federal Rule 26 disclosure requirements, as many other States have adopted, California will now also mandate (upon demand) that a party produce evidence without an arduous and possibly duplicative effort. In other words, this initial disclosure will require a party making initial disclosures of persons or records to additionally disclose persons or records that are relevant to the subject matter of the action and to disclose information and records regarding insurance policies or contracts that would make a person or insurance company liable to satisfy a judgment. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP