BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut expert witness windows
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Expert Builders Information
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Connecticut Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Case law precedent


    Building Expert Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Fairfield Connecticut

    License required for electrical and plumbing trades. No state license for general contracting, however, must register with the State.


    Building Expert Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Home Builders & Remo Assn of Fairfield Co
    Local # 0780
    433 Meadow St
    Fairfield, CT 06824

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Builders Association of Eastern Connecticut
    Local # 0740
    20 Hartford Rd Suite 18
    Salem, CT 06420

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of New Haven Co
    Local # 0720
    2189 Silas Deane Highway
    Rocky Hill, CT 06067

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Hartford Cty Inc
    Local # 0755
    2189 Silas Deane Hwy
    Rocky Hill, CT 06067

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of NW Connecticut
    Local # 0710
    110 Brook St
    Torrington, CT 06790

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Connecticut (State)
    Local # 0700
    3 Regency Dr Ste 204
    Bloomfield, CT 06002

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10


    Building Expert News and Information
    For Fairfield Connecticut


    Insureds' Summary Judgment Motion on Mold Limitation Denied

    Crews Tested By Rocky Ground, Utility Challenges

    OSHA Updates: New Submission Requirements for Injury and Illness Records

    Chinese Billionaire Developer Convicted in UN Bribery Case

    Homebuilders Leading U.S. Consumer Stocks: EcoPulse

    Know What’s Under Ground and Make Smarter Planning Decisions

    Illinois Federal Court Applies Insurer-Friendly “Mutual Exclusive Theories” Test To Independent Counsel Analysis

    Hammer & Hand’s Top Ten Predictions for US High Performance Building in 2014

    Subsequent Owners of Homes Again Have Right to Sue Builders for Construction Defects

    California Supreme Court Declares that Exclusionary Rule for Failing to Comply with Expert Witness Disclosures Applies at the Summary Judgment Stage

    Has Hydrogen's Time Finally Come?

    New York Appellate Court Holds Insurer’s Failure to Defend Does Not Constitute a “Reasonable Excuse” Required to Overturn Judgment

    Engineer at Flint Negligence Trial Details Government Water Errors

    Construction Robots 2023

    Condo Owners Allege Construction Defects at Trump Towers

    Gehry-Designed Project Seen Bringing NYC Vibe to L.A.

    Homeowners May Not Need to Pay Lien on Defective Log Cabin

    Ways of Evaluating Property Damage Claims in Various Contexts

    Ohio Supreme Court Case to Decide Whether or Not to Expand Insurance Coverage Under GC’s CGL Insurance Policies

    2023 Construction Outlook: Construction Starts Expected to Flatten

    The Conscious Builder – Interview with Casey Grey

    Insurance Policies and Indemnity Provisions Are Not the Same

    Research Institute: A Shared Information Platform Reduces Construction Costs Considerably

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

    2014 WCC Panel: Working Smarter with Technology

    Business Insurance Names Rachel Hudgins Among 2024 Break Out Award Winners

    Catch 22: “If You’re Moving Dirt, You Need to Control Your Dust” (But Don’t Use Potable Water!)

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Win Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings In Favor of Insurer

    COVID-19 Response: California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board Implements Sweeping New Regulations to Prevent COVID-19 in the Workplace

    Employee Screening and Testing in the Covid-19 Era: Getting Back to Work

    The Comcast Project is Not Likely to Be Shut Down Too Long

    Business Interruption Insurance Coverage Act of 2020: Yet Another Reason to Promptly Notify Insurers of COVID-19 Losses

    Policy Reformed to Add New Building Owner as Additional Insured

    California Mediation Confidentiality May Apply to Third Party “Participants” Retained to Provide Analysis

    Without Reservations: Fourth Circuit Affirms That Vague Reservation of Rights Waived Insurers’ Coverage Arguments

    9 Positive Housing Statistics by Builder

    5 Impressive Construction Projects in North Carolina

    Court Orders City to Pay for Sewer Backups

    LaGuardia Airport Is a Mess. An Engineer-Turned-Fund Manager Has a Fix

    White and Williams Recognizes Women’s History Month: Remembering Virginia Barton Wallace

    Lewis Brisbois Ranked Tier 1 Nationally for Insurance Law, Mass Tort/Class Actions Defense by U.S. News/Best Lawyers

    Be Careful When Walking Off of a Construction Project

    Canada Housing Surprises Again With July Starts Increase

    Dorian Lashes East Canada, Then Weakens Heading Out to Sea

    Foundation Differences Across the U.S.

    Used French Fry Oil Fuels London Offices as Buildings Go Green

    U.S. Building Permits Soared to Their Highest Level in Nearly Eight Years

    Despite Feds' Raised Bar, 2.8B Massachusetts Offshore Wind Project Presses On

    Design-Build Contracting: Is the Shine Off the Apple?

    Foreclosures Decreased Nationally in September
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert 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.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Claims Litigated Under Government Claims Act Must “Fairly Reflect” Factual Claims Made in Underlying Government Claim

    November 27, 2023 —
    Unlike horseshoes and hand grenades, close sometimes isn’t close enough. In the next case, Hernandez v. City of Stockton, 90 Cal.App.5th 1222 (2023), the Third District Court of appeal found that a pedestrian who sued a public entity for personal injuries caused by an “uplifted sidewalk” was barred from pursuing his claim when it was revealed that he had in fact injured himself by falling into a hole left by an “empty tree well” (i.e., a tree well that did not contain a tree”). According to the Court, the pedestrian’s claim was barred because the factual basis for recovery asserted in his complaint was not “fairly reflected” in his government claim. The Hernandez Case In April 2018, pedestrian Manual Sanchez Hernandez injured himself while walking on a public sidewalk in Stockton, California. He submitted a government claim with the City of Stockton claiming that his injuries, which included injuries to his knee, hands and back, was caused by a dangerous condition on public property. In his government claim, Hernandez alleged that he tripped on an “uplifted sidewalk” at or near 230 E. Charter Way in Stockton, California and that his injuries were due because the City “negligently and recklessly designed, maintained and operated the subject property so as to cause [his] injuries.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Court Rejects Efforts to Limit Scope of Judgment Creditor’s Direct Action Under Insurance Code Section 11580

    May 01, 2019 —
    In Ins. Co. of St. of PA v. Amer. Safety Indemnity Co. (No. B283684, filed 3/1/19) (“ICSOP”), a California appeals court rejected one insurer’s efforts to limit the scope of another insurer’s direct action as a judgment creditor under Insurance Code section 11580(b)(2). In ICSOP, homeowners filed a claim in arbitration against their general contractor alleging damages from subsidence. While the arbitration was pending, the general contractor filed suit against the grading subcontractor seeking indemnity and contribution. The complaint attached the homeowners’ complaint in arbitration pleading damages of $2.3 million, and alleged that the subcontractors had a duty to indemnify for those damages. The arbitrator awarded the homeowners $1.1 million. The general contractor was insured by plaintiff ICSOP, which paid the arbitration award. A default judgment was entered against the grading subcontractor for $1.5 million, that included both the arbitration award plus $356,340 for the general contractor’s attorney’s fees. American Safety insured the grading subcontractor but refused to indemnify ICSOP. ICSOP then sued American Safety on the default judgment, pursuant to Insurance Code section 11580(b). The trial court granted summary judgment for ICSOP and the appeals court affirmed. Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Disgruntled Online Reviews of Attorney by Disgruntled Former Client Ordered Removed from Yelp.com

    June 30, 2016 —
    The Court of Appeal of the State of California – First Appellate District in Hassell v. Bird (6/7/16 – Case No. A143233) affirmed an order from a judgment in favor of an attorney and her firm and against a disgruntled former client directing non-party Yelp.com to remove defamatory reviews posted to its site. Attorney Dawn Hassell (“Hassell”) filed suit against Ava Bird (“Bird”) arising out of Hassell’s brief legal representation. The attorney/client relationship lasted a total of 25 days after which Hassell withdrew from the representation because of difficulties communicating with Bird and Bird expressed dissatisfaction with Hassell. When legal representation terminated, Bird had 21 months before the expiration of the statute of limitations on her personal injury claim. Reprinted courtesy of Renata L. Hoddinott, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and David W. Evans, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Evans may be contacted at devans@hbblaw.com Ms. Hoddinott may be contacted at rhoddinott@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Receiving a $0 Verdict and Still Being Deemed the Prevailing Party for Purposes of Attorney’s Fees

    May 24, 2018 —
    Low and behold, a party can be the prevailing party for purposes of attorney’s fees even if that party is awarded $0. That’s right, even if the party is awarded a big fat zero, they can still be the prevailing party for purposes of being entitled to attorney’s fees. This is because a party is the prevailing party if they prevail on the significant issues in the case. A party can prevail on the significant issues even if that party is awarded $0. Whoa! For example, in Coconut Key Homeowner’s Association, Inc. v. Gonzalez, 43 Fla.L.Weekly D1045a (Fla. 4th DCA 2018), a homeowner sued her homeowner’s association claiming the association breached its governing documents. There was a basis for fees under Florida’s homeowner’s association law (and there likely was a basis under the governing documents). At trial, the jury held that the association breached its governing documents, but awarded the homeowner nothing ($0). The trial court also issued injunctive relief in favor of the homeowner. The homeowner claimed she should be deemed the prevailing party for purposes of attorney’s fees; however, this was denied by the trial court based on the $0 verdict and no fees were awarded to the homeowner. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    3D Printing: A New Era in Concrete Construction

    April 11, 2022 —
    The construction of buildings using concrete has been around since the time of the Romans. In all those centuries, concrete structures have been built using essentially the same method: forms, reinforcement, mixing, pouring, setting, repeat. The process is costly and time-consuming. The construction of the forms alone demands dozens of workers and requires a substantial amount of lumber, keeping labor and materials costs high. Builders might save some time using prefabricated concrete blocks, but such materials are not appropriate for every construction project and carry their own expenses. For the first time in history, builders have an alternative to traditional concrete construction methods that are more cost-effective, less expensive, more environmentally friendly and allow for a wide range of possible construction projects. Three-dimensional concrete printing for construction has emerged in the building field as a viable and efficient alternative. Reprinted courtesy of Zoey Zhao, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Ms. Zhao may be contacted at zoey@aictbuild.com

    DRCOG’s Findings on the Impact of Construction Defect Litigation Have Been Released (And the Results Should Not Surprise You)

    November 13, 2013 —
    The downward trend in attached-housing construction in Colorado is well-known and discussed often within the region’s construction, insurance, finance, and legal communities. In recent years, builders and insurers in particular have striven to bring greater awareness to local governments and lawmakers regarding the impact that construction defect lawsuits have on the builders’ ability to introduce desirable, affordable, yet cost-efficient attached-housing options, such as condominiums and townhomes, into the marketplace. The Denver Regional Council of Governments (“DRCOG”) has been aware of the builders’ and insurers’ plight, largely because of the impact that the scarcity of affordable attached-housing has had on their respective communities. On October 29th, DRCOG released its long-awaited Denver Metro Area Housing Diversity Study, prepared by Economic & Planning Systems, Inc., which investigated the factors contributing to the recent (downward) attached-housing development trends and conditions. The Study evaluated factors including changing financing and insurance requirements for builders and homebuyers, the impacts of foreclosures, changes in prospective homebuyer demographics, economic conditions which limit options for prospective homebuyers, and the costs and risks associated with construction defect regulations and lawsuits. Despite the retorts and rebukes of the naysayers, the negative impact of construction defect regulations and lawsuits on Colorado’s housing market is significant. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Derek Lindenschmidt
    Derek Lindenschmidt can be contacted at lindenschmidt@hhmrlaw.com

    Illinois Federal Court Applies Insurer-Friendly “Mutual Exclusive Theories” Test To Independent Counsel Analysis

    November 09, 2020 —
    Insureds often request independent counsel when insurers agree to provide a defense subject to a reservation of rights, pursuant to which an insurer takes the position that certain damages may not be indemnifiable. Requests for independent counsel are often rooted in fear that a defense attorney who has a relationship with the insurer may be incentivized to defend the insured in a way that maximizes the potential for the insurer to succeed on its coverage defenses. As explained by the Illinois Supreme Court in Maryland Cas. Co. v. Peppers, 355 N.E.2d 24 (Ill. 1976), when a conflict of interest arises between an insurer and its insured, the attorney appointed by the insurer is faced with serious ethical questions and the insured is entitled to its own attorney. Illinois courts generally follow the rule that an insured is entitled to independent counsel upon a showing of an actual conflict. In Builders Concrete Servs., LLC v. Westfield Nat’l Ins. Co., No. 19 C 7792, 2020 WL 5518474 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 14, 2020), the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois recently addressed a dispute between an insurer and its insured about independent counsel. Westfield insured Builders Concrete Services (BCS). Focus Construction hired BCS as a subcontractor to perform concrete work on a new apartment building. BCS’ work included pouring concrete for structural columns, one of which buckled and failed. BCS sued Focus Construction for withholding payment, and Focus Construction counter-sued for breach of contract and negligence relating to BCS’ alleged faulty work that caused the column to fall. Focus Construction’s counterclaim alleged that the column failure damaged other parts of the building on which Builders did not perform work. 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

    Amazon Hits Pause on $2.5B HQ2 Project in Arlington, Va.

    March 27, 2023 —
    Amazon is tapping the brakes on its $2.5-billion HQ2 second headquarters project in Arlington County, Va., announcing an indefinite delay to the start of the program’s 2.8-million-sq-ft second phase, known as PenPlace. Reprinted courtesy of Jim Parsons, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of