BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildings
    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


    Texas Supreme Court: Breach of Contract Not Required to Prevail on Statutory Bad Faith Claim

    Ohio Court of Appeals: Absolute Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage For Workplace Coal-Tar Pitch Exposure Claims

    New Case Law Alert: Licensed General Contractors Cannot Sue Owners to Recover Funds for Work Performed by An Unlicensed Subcontractor

    New Mexico Adopts Right to Repair Act

    Building Growth Raises Safety Concerns

    Understanding Entitlement to Delays and Proper Support

    Court of Appeals Discusses the Difference Between “Claims-Made” and “Occurrence-Based” Insurance Policies

    Heathrow Tempts Runway Opponents With $1,200 Christmas Sweetener

    Application of Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine Supports Coverage

    Construction Costs Absorb Two Big Hits This Quarter

    Why Construction Firms Should Think Differently on the Issue of Sustainability

    “Genuine” Issue of “Material” Fact and Summary Judgments

    California’s One-Action Rule May Apply to Federal Lenders

    Global Insurer Agrees to Pay COVID-19 Business Interruption Claims

    Subcontractor's Faulty Workmanship Is Not an "Occurrence"

    Hollywood Legend Betty Grable’s Former Home for Sale

    Repairs Could Destroy Evidence in Construction Defect Suit

    Delay Leads to Problems with Construction Defects

    Defining Construction Defects

    Are Millennials Finally Moving Out On Their Own?

    Mediation in the Zero Sum World of Construction

    San Francisco Half-Built Apartment Complex Destroyed by Fire

    Bad Faith Claim for Investigation Fails

    Sixth Circuit Finds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Under Kentucky Law

    Is It Time to Digitize Safety?

    Axa Buys London Pinnacle Site for Redesigned Skyscraper

    Kahana Feld Partner Jeff Miragliotta and Senior Associate Rachael Marvin Obtain Early Dismissal of Commercial Litigation Cases in New York and New Jersey

    Consider Arbitration Provision in Homebuilder’s Warranty and Purchase-and-Sale Agreement

    Are COVID-19 Claims Covered by Builders Risk Insurance Policies?

    Building 47 Bridges in Two Years

    FEMA, Congress Eye Pre-Disaster Funding, Projects

    The Economic Loss Rule: From Where Does the Duty Arise?

    Steel Component Plant Linked to West Virginia Governor Signs $1M Pollution Pact

    Vallagio v. Metropolitan Homes: Colorado Supreme Court Upholds Declarant Consent Provision to Amend Arbitration Out of Declarations

    Supreme Court Set to Alter Law on Key Project, Workforce Issues

    Pennsylvania Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C-" Grade

    Foreman in Fatal NYC Trench Collapse Gets Jail Sentence

    Builder and County Tussle over Unfinished Homes

    Some Construction Contract Basics- Necessities and Pitfalls

    From ‘Cuckoo’s Egg’ to Today’s Cyber Threat Landscape

    Stay of Coverage Case Appropriate While Court Determines Arbitrability of Dispute

    Illinois Court Determines Insurer Must Defend Negligent Misrepresentation Claim

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

    Housing Agency Claims It Is Not a Party in Construction Defect Case

    Broker Not Liable for Failure to Reveal Insurer's Insolvency After Policy Issued

    With Trump's Tariff Talk, Time to Negotiate for Escalation Clauses in Construction Contracts

    Read the Property Insurance Policy to be Sure You are Complying with Post Loss Obligations

    Hovnanian Reports “A Year of Solid Profitability”

    The Fifth Circuit, Applying Texas Law, Strikes Down Auto Exclusion

    Disputes Over Arbitrator Qualifications: The Northern District of California Offers Some Guidance
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert 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.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Hirer Liable for Injury to Subcontractor’s Employee Due to Failure to Act, Not Just Affirmative Acts, Holds Court of Appeal

    December 11, 2018 —
    The Privette doctrine, named after the court case Privette v. Superior Court (1993) 5 Cal.4th 689, provides that a higher-tiered party such as an owner or general contractor is not liable for injuries sustained by employees of a lower-tiered party such as a subcontractor on a construction project. There are, however, exceptions to the Privette doctrine. One of these exceptions is known as the “retained control doctrine.” Under the retained control doctrine, a higher-tiered party cannot avoid liability under the Privette doctrine if the higher-tiered party: (1) retains control over the conditions of the work; (2) negligently exercises control over such conditions; and (3) its negligent exercise of control contributes to the injuries sustained by the employee of the lower-tiered party. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel, Rosen, Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    Hawaii Supreme Court Tackles "Other Insurance" Issues

    February 25, 2014 —
    Responding to four certified questions from the Ninth Circuit, the Hawaii Supreme Court addressed various issues raised by competing "other insurance" provisions in two CGL policies. Nautilus Ins. Co. v. Lexington Ins. Co., 2014 Haw. LEXIS 59 (Haw. Feb. 13, 2014). Coverage for a development on Maui was at issue. The developer, VP & PK (ML) LLC, was insured by Lexington. The other insurance provision in Lexington's policy provided it was excess over "any other primary insurance available to you covering liability for damages arising out of the premises . . . for which you have been added as an additional insured." Kila Kila Construction was one of VP & PK's subcontractors. Kika Kila was not an additional insured under Lexington's policy. Kila Kila had its own CGL policy with Nautilus. The Nautilus other insurance clause stated the insurance was excess over "any other primary insurance available to you covering liability arising out of the premises or operations for which you ahve been added as an additional insured." An endorsement added VP & PK as an additional insured, but only for liability arising out of Kila Kila's negligence. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    House Panel Subpoenas VA Documents on Colorado Project

    September 22, 2016 —
    The Dept. of Veterans Affairs has received a subpoena from the House Veterans Affairs Committee, asking for more information about the VA’s long-delayed, far over-budget hospital under construction in Aurora, Colo. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tom Ichniowski, Engineering News-Record
    Mr. Ichniowski may be contacted at ichniowskit@enr.com

    New Orleans Is Auctioning Off Vacant Lots Online

    March 12, 2015 —
    New Orleans is selling almost 1,800 properties on the Web to fatten its tax coffers and build on the momentum it's enjoying in the local real estate market. The question is, who's going to show up for the online auction, and what are they going to do with the lots they buy? On Friday, the city posted a list of 1,786 properties—90 percent of them vacant lots—that it plans to sell in the auction. Bidding on the properties, of which the city took control after the owners failed to pay property taxes, will start at $3,000 in most cases, plus the cost of trying to track down the most recent owner. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Clark, Bloomberg
    Mr. Clark may be contacted at jclark185@bloomberg.net

    The California Legislature Return the Power Back to the People by Passing the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018

    January 02, 2019 —
    Introduction Data breaches and social media hacks are becoming increasingly common stories on the news cycle. Meanwhile, companies have made fortunes on unsuspecting individuals by selling information gathered on the user. Every internet user has wondered why a pop-up ad or banner on an unrelated website relates to something you purchased or searched for "that one time. The California legislature has decided to return some power back to the people with the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018. California is the first state to introduce privacy protection for individuals personal data and could pave the way for other states to follow suit in the near future. The California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 On June 28, 2018, California Governor Jerry Brown signed into law the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 ("the Act"). The California Legislature eagerly passed the Act, which comes into effect on January 1, 2020, granting broad new privacy rights to "consumers" and enforcing requirements on the protection of their personal data allowing consumers the right to take back control of their personal information. A "consumer" is defined as a "resident of California as defined by California's personal income tax regulations. "Personal information" pursuant to the Act is defined as "information that identifies, relates to, describes, is capable of being associated with, or could reasonably be linked, directly or indirectly, with a particular consumer or household." Personal information is generally recognized in California as information that can identify a specific individual. The Act also includes information that can be used to identify a household. Provisions of the Act Pursuant to the Act, consumers are given the right to know upon request if their personal information is disclosed, and to whom it is disclosed, the right to know what personal information has been collected about them by a business, the right to object to the sale of their personal information, the right to obtain data collected about them, the right to require businesses to obliterate their personal information, and the right to be given equal service and pricing from businesses, including equal prices and quality of goods or services. The Act forbids discrimination by businesses against consumers for exercising their privacy rights pursuant to the Act. Businesses are, however, permitted to charge different prices or provide different quality of service to consumers if the difference is "reasonably related to the value provided to the consumer by the consumer’s data." Additionally, businesses must allow consumers to exercise their rights by providing to consumers toll-free telephone numbers and/or websites to request such information or privacy. If a consumer sends a verified request for information to a business, the business subsequently has 45 days to give the consumer the requested information from the preceding 12 months with no charge to the consumer. Who Must Comply with the Act The Act will apply to for-profit businesses that do business in the State of California, deal with personal information of California residents, and either·(1) have more than $25 million in annual gross revenues, or (2) receive or disclose more than 50,000 California residents' personal information, or(3) derive 50% or greater of California residents' annual revenues from selling their personal information. Who is Exempted from Compliance with the Act A for-profit company, a small company, and/or a company that does not derive large amounts of personal information and does not share a brand with an affiliate covered by the Act is exempted from complying with the Act. Additionally, a company is exempted from compliance with the Act "if every aspect of . . . commercial conduct takes place wholly outside of California," meaning: (1) the personal information was collected from the consumer while they were outside California, (2) no sale of their personal information took place in California, and (3) there was no sale of personal information that was collected while the consumer was in California. Impact According to 2017 estimates, California's population totaled approximately 39 million people. Clearly the Act will affect an incredibly large amount of people considering it concerns the most populous state in America. The California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, which is being compared to the EU General Data Protection Regulation for its all-encompassing method and resilient privacy protections is also speculated to have an impact on businesses throughout the nation and around the world. While the costs will likely go up for companies to do business in California, the transparency and trust earned by business and gained by consumers in this new landscape could potential overcome the initial costs to provide these required services. Perhaps most importantly however, is if California consumers decide to take advantage of the new protections, they will no longer have to wonder what for-profit businesses are doing with their data. Reprinted courtesy of Chapman Glucksman Dean Roeb & Barger attorneys Richard H. Glucksman, David A. Napper and Lana Halavi Mr. Glucksman may be contacted at rglucksman@cgdrblaw.com Mr. Napper may be contacted at dnapper@cgdrblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Washington First State to Require Electric Heat Pumps

    May 23, 2022 —
    A new ruling in Washington state that will require all new commercial buildings to use electric heat pumps is supported by environmentalists but opposed by several construction industry interests. The opposition fears the rule will have a negative impact on the cost and volume of real estate development. Reprinted courtesy of James Leggate, Engineering News-Record Mr. Leggate may be contacted at leggatej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Beyond Inverse Condemnation in Wildfire Litigation: An Oregon Jury Finds Utility Liable for Negligence, Trespass and Nuisance

    July 10, 2023 —
    On June 10, 2023, a jury in Portland, Oregon found PacifiCorp and Pacific Power (collectively, “PacifiCorp”) liable for negligence, trespass, and nuisance based on a series of four wildfires that occurred during Labor Day weekend in 2020. PacifiCorp prevailed against the plaintiffs on the claim of inverse condemnation. With respect to the tort-based claims, the jury awarded approximately $72 million in compensatory damages to 17 plaintiffs. The jury later found PacifiCorp liable for $18 million in punitive damages, or one quarter of the compensatory damages that the jury awarded to the 17 plaintiffs. The jury’s liability findings apply to a broader class of owners, whose damages will need to be individually proven in a yet-to-be defined second phase of proceedings. Post-verdict motion practice and appeals may affect the jury’s findings. Reprinted courtesy of Marisa Miller, Sheppard Mullin, John Yacovelle, Sheppard Mullin and Kazim Naqvi, Sheppard Mullin Ms. Miller may be contacted at mmiller@sheppardmullin.com Mr. Yacovelle may be contacted at jyacovelle@sheppardmullin.com Mr. Naqvi may be contacted at knaqvi@sheppardmullin.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Despite Health Concerns, Judge Reaffirms Sentence for Disbarred Las Vegas Attorney

    October 02, 2015 —
    The Las Vegas Review-Journal reported that the “life-threatening health and custody status of disbarred Las Vegas attorney Barry Levinson remained uncertain Thursday after a judge refused to reconsider his harsh prison sentence.” Levinson had been convicted of defrauding homeowners associations. Brent Bryson, Levinson’s attorney, claims that the stress of custody issues has caused health problems for his client, reported the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Bryan stated that “Levinson had heart failure while in federal custody and needs either a special heart valve operation in Southern California or a heart transplant to survive.” District Judge Michael Villani suggested that Bryson should file a civil suit for the matter. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of