BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expert
    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


    MGM Begins Dismantling of the Las Vegas Harmon Tower

    Coverage Article - To Settle or Not To Settle?

    Gary Bague Elected Chairman of ALFA International’s Board of Directors

    Mark Van Wonterghem To Serve as Senior Forensic Consultant in the Sacramento Offices of Bert L. Howe & Associates, Inc.

    Arizona Supreme Court Upholds Constitutionality of Provision Relating to Statutory Authority for Constructing and Operating Sports and Tourism Complexes

    Flood-Threat Assessment Finds Danger Goes Far Beyond U.S. Homes

    Mediation Clause Can Stay a Miller Act Claim, Just Not Forever

    How Will Today’s Pandemic Impact Tomorrow’s Construction Contracts?

    Kahana Feld Receives 2024 OCCDL Top Legal Organizations for DEI Award

    Not Just Another Client Alert about Cyber-Risk and Effective Cybersecurity Insurance Regulatory Guidance

    NJ Condo Construction Defect Case Dismissed over Statute of Limitations

    Green Construction Claims: More of the Same

    Denial of Coverage For Bodily Injury After Policy Period Does Not Violate Public Policy

    Supreme Court of Canada Broadly Interprets Exception to Faulty Workmanship Exclusion

    Construction Company Head Pleads Guilty to Insurance and Tax Fraud

    Fed. Judge Blocks Release of Records on FIU Bridge Collapse, Citing NTSB Investigation

    Mitigating Mold Exposure in Manufacturing and Multifamily Buildings

    Rejection’s a Bear- Particularly in Construction

    Contractor Prevails on Summary Judgment To Establish Coverage under Subcontractor's Policy

    Of Pavement and Pandemic: Liability and Regulatory Hurdles for Taking It Outside

    Lenders and Post-Foreclosure Purchasers Have Standing to Make Construction Defect Claims for After-Discovered Conditions

    New York Team Secures Appellate Win on Behalf of National Home Improvement Chain

    9th Circuit Plumbs Through the Federal and State False Claims Acts

    Guidance for Structural Fire Engineering Making Its Debut

    Utilities’ Extreme Plan to Stop Wildfires: Shut Off the Power

    Alexander Moore Promoted to Managing Partner of Kahana Feld’s Oakland Office

    London's Walkie Talkie Tower Voted Britain's Worst New Building

    Supreme Court Upholds Prevailing Wage Statute

    Pile Test Likely for Settling Millennium Tower

    Washington State Supreme Court Issues Landmark Decision on Spearin Doctrine

    Burden Supporting Termination for Default

    Performance Bond Primer: Need to Knows and Need to Dos

    Traub Lieberman Partners Ryan Jones and Scot Samis Obtain Affirmation of Final Summary Judgment

    At $350 Million, Beverly Hillbillies Mansion Is Most Expensive in U.S.

    Developer’s Failure to Plead Amount of Damages in Cross-Complaint Fatal to Direct Action Against Subcontractor’s Insurers Based on Default Judgment

    NYC Developer Embraces Religion in Search for Condo Sites

    Toll Brothers Climbs After Builder Reports Higher Sales

    These Are the 13 Cities Where Millennials Can't Afford a Home

    Insurer Entitled to Reimbursement of Defense Costs Under Unjust Enrichment Theory

    No Coverage for Sink Hole Loss

    Condemnation Actions: How Valuable Is Your Evidence of Property Value?

    The Hidden Dangers of Construction Defect Litigation: A Redux

    Owner’s Obligation Giving Notice to Cure to Contractor and Analyzing Repair Protocol

    Four Companies Sued in Pool Electrocution Case

    California Condo Architects Not Liable for Construction Defects?

    Falls Requiring Time Off from Work are Increasing

    Alabama Court Determines No Coverage For Insured's Faulty Workmanship

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

    Tariffs, Supply Snarls Spur Search for Factories Closer to U.S.

    Super Lawyers Selects Haight Lawyers for Its 2024 Southern California Rising Stars List
    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

    Will AI Completely Transform Our Use of Computers?

    July 22, 2024 —
    Last November, I received a newsletter from Bill Gates titled “AI is about to completely change how we use computers.” Gates begins his letter with a prediction: “Five years from now, you won’t have to use different apps for different tasks. You’ll simply tell your device, in everyday language, what you want to do—whether it’s drafting a document, making a spreadsheet, scheduling a meeting, analyzing data, sending an email, or even buying movie tickets.“ Gates dives deeper into the topic in his blog post. Revolution in Computing Gates discusses the revolutionary impact of AI on computing, comparing it to the transformative effects of mobile phones and the Internet. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Disaster Remediation Contracts: Understanding the Law to Avoid a Second Disaster

    August 30, 2017 —
    In the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey, consumers and contractors should be aware of protections prescribed by the Texas Legislature for Disaster Remediation Contracts. Chapter 58 of the Texas Business and Commerce Code includes several important consumer protections. Consumers should be aware of these protections, and contractors should take care to avoid inadvertent violations. This statute applies to a contractor engaged in “disaster remediation,” in a county subject to a disaster declaration. Those contracts are subject to certain notice provisions and limitations. A violation of Chapter 58 is considered a Deceptive Trade Practice and could subject a violator to both public and private remedies. The full text of Chapter 58 is found here: http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/BC/htm/BC.58.htm. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Todd Colvard, Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Mr. Colvard may be contacted at tcolvard@pecklaw.com

    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 court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss "Redundant Claims" Denied

    June 21, 2024 —
    The insurer's motion to dismiss was more appropriate for an eventual summary judgment motion and was consequently denied. Sivan Lam v. Scottsdale Ins. Co., 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81262 (M.D. Fla. April 12, 2024). Lam suffered a loss to her home due to Hurricane Ian. When only a portion of the claim was paid, Lam sued his insurer, Scottsdale, for breach of contract (Count I) and declaratory relief (Count II). Scottsdale argued that Lam's request for declaratory relief was redundant of her breach of contract claim. The court noted that Rule 12 (b)(6), Fed. R. Civil P., was a vehicle to challenge a claim's sufficiency. Redundancy was not insufficiency, and it was not a ground for dismissal under Rule 12 (b)(6). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

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

    June 10, 2015 —
    In Albert v. Mid-Century Insurance Co. (No. B257792, filed 4/28/15, ord. pub. 5/20/15), a California Court of Appeal held that an insured’s trimming of a neighbor’s trees which allegedly damaged the trees was not an accident or occurrence covered by her homeowners insurance, despite a mistaken and good faith belief as to where the property line lay. Ms. Albert was sued by her adjoining neighbor, who alleged damage to his property when she erected an encroaching fence and pruned nine mature olive trees on his property. The two parcels shared a reciprocal roadway easement providing for access to the main public road. At some point, Ms. Albert erected a fence that was subsequently determined to be on the neighbor’s land, and which enclosed a grove of nine mature olive trees. Ms. Albert claimed that the trees straddled the property line and were mutually owned. She pointed out that she had regularly been notified by the Los Angeles Fire Department to clear the area, and that she had been trimming the trees for years. Thus, she claimed a good faith belief that the trees were hers and that she was required to trim them. Contending that her trimming had caused severe damage by reducing the aesthetic and monetary value of the trees, the neighbor sued alleging causes of action for trespass to real property and trees; abatement of private nuisance; declaratory relief; and for quiet title. He sought treble damages under Civil Code sections 733 and 3346, for injury to timber or trees. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com; Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Fire Tests Inspire More Robust Timber Product Standard

    March 22, 2018 —
    Based on recent fire test results, mass timber groups have adjusted product certification standards to require the use of cross-laminated timber with structural adhesives tested to demonstrate better fire performance. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, Engineering News-Record
    Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com

    Anchorage Building Codes Credited for Limited Damage After Quakes

    January 08, 2019 —
    The magnitudes 7.0 and 5.7 earthquakes that struck Anchorage, Alaska, on Nov. 30 shook buildings and shattered highways, but caused limited structural damage and no reported loss of life, mostly due to the depth and location of the quake’s epicenter, as well as the city and state’s stringent building requirements. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christine Kilpatrick - ENR
    Ms. Kilpatrick may be contacted at kilpatrickc@enr.com

    Rooftop Owners Sue Cubs Consultant for Alleged False Statements

    January 24, 2014 —
    A disagreement over signage potentially blocking rooftop owner’s views has stalled Wrigley Field’s proposed $300 million renovation, reported the Chicago Tribune. However, a recently lawsuit filed between the two entities regarded allegedly false statements made by Marc Ganic, a Chicago sports business consultant, published in the Chicago Sun-Times: “In the story, Ganis is quoted as saying the rooftop clubs were ‘stealing’ the Cubs product for their own profit,” according to the Chicago Tribune. The rooftop owners claimed in the suit that “they have a contractual arrangement with the team that allows them to sell tickets to people who want bird’s-eye views of the game.” The Chicago Tribune attempted to contact Ganis for comment, but he “did not return several messages.” The rooftop owners and the Cubs entered into a “20-year agreement in 2004 in which the rooftop owners pay the Cubs 17 percent of the team's yearly profits in exchange for unobstructed views into the ballpark,” according to ESPN. “The Cubs dispute that notion, however, contending the unobstructed views were guaranteed through the landmarking of the bleachers not with the agreement they have with the rooftop owners.” Business president Crane Kenney explained to ESPN that the city council amended the landmarking rule for the field: “[The council has] now recognized the outfield is not a historic feature. And above a 10-foot level we can have signage. That was the big win last summer, among many. That's what the rooftops would contest.” According to ESPN the Cubs will not start the renovation project until they have an agreement with the rooftop owners “that includes a guarantee not to sue the Cubs for breach of contract, which would delay construction.” Read the full story at the Chicago Tribune... Read the full story at ESPN... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of