BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witness
    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


    Despite Increased Presence in Construction, Women Lack Size-Appropriate PPE

    Oregon Bridge Closed to Inspect for Defects

    Appellate Team Secures Victory in North Carolina Governmental Immunity Personal Injury Matter

    Denial of Motion to Dissolve Lis Pendens Does Not Automatically Create Basis for Certiorari Relief

    Beginning of the 2020 Colorado Legislative Session: Here We Go Again

    Another Case Highlighting the Difference Between CGL Policies and Performance Bonds

    Construction Industry Outlook: Building a Better Tomorrow

    White and Williams Ranked in Top Tiers of "Best Law Firms"

    Recent Bribery and Anti-Corruption Enforcement Trends in Global Construction Industry

    Moving Toward a Telework Future: A Checklist of Considerations for Employers

    Federal Government Partial Shutdown – Picking Up the Pieces

    Skyline Cockpit’s Game-Changing Tower Crane Teleoperation

    Standard For Evaluating Delay – Directly from An Armed Services Board Of Contract Appeal’s Opinion

    Supreme Court Grants Petition for Review Regarding Necessary Parties in Lien Foreclosure Actions

    South Carolina Court of Appeals Diverges from Damico Opinion, Sending Recent Construction Defects Cases to Arbitration

    Lorelie S. Masters Nominated for Best in Insurance & Reinsurance for the Women in Business Law Awards 2021

    Las Vegas’ McCarran Tower Construction Issues Delays Opening

    An Increase of US Metro Areas’ with Normal Housing & Economic Health

    Practical Advice: Indemnification and Additional Insured Issues Revisited

    Los Angeles Is Building a Future Where Water Won’t Run Out

    U.S. Housing Starts Exceed Estimates After a Stronger December

    When a Request for Equitable Adjustment Should Be Treated as a Claim Under the Contract Disputes Act

    Condominiums and Homeowners Associations Remain Popular Housing Choices for U-S Homeowners

    Sarah P. Long Expands Insurance Coverage Team at Payne & Fears

    First Suit to Enforce Business-Interruption Coverage Filed

    The New Industrial Revolution: Rebuilding America and the World

    Federal Court Asks South Dakota Supreme Court to Decide Whether Injunction Costs Are “Damages,” Adopts Restatement’s Position on Providing “Inadequate” Defense

    Pulled from the Swamp: EPA Wetland Determination Now Judicially Reviewable

    Important New Reporting Requirement for Some Construction Defect Settlements

    Homeowners Must Comply with Arbitration over Construction Defects

    Duuers: Better Proposals with Less Work

    "Your Work" Exclusion Bars Coverage for Contractor's Faulty Workmanship

    Summary Judgment Granted to Insurer for Hurricane Damage

    When Licensing Lapses: How One Contractor Lost a $1 Million Dispute

    Spreading Cracks On FIU Bridge Failed to Alarm Project Team

    Property Owner Found Liable for Injuries to Worker of Unlicensed Contractor, Again

    Architect Not Responsible for Injuries to Guests

    Be Careful How You Terminate: Terminating for Convenience May Limit Your Future Rights

    Building a Strong ESG Program Can Fuel Growth and Reduce Company Risk

    Grenfell Fire Probe Faults Construction Industry Practices

    Mercury News Editorial Calls for Investigation of Bay Bridge Construction

    Final Thoughts on New Pay If Paid Legislation in VA

    Proving Contractor Licensure in California. The Tribe Has Spoken

    Construction Managers, Are You Exposing Yourselves to Labor Law Liability?

    Pennsylvania Superior Court Fires up a Case-By-Case Analysis for Landlord-Tenant, Implied Co-Insured Questions

    Florida Law: Interplay of SIR and the Made-Whole Doctrine

    California Court of Appeal Holds a Tenant Owes No Duty to Protect a Social Guest From a Defective Sidewalk Leading to a Condominium Unit

    A Court-Side Seat: Citizen Suits, “Facility” Management and Some Nuance for Your Hazard Ranking

    Housing Starts in U.S. Little Changed From Stronger January

    The “Right to Repair” Construction Defects in the Rocky Mountain and Plains Region
    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. Drawing 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

    What is the Implied Warranty of Habitability?

    October 02, 2018 —
    The implied warranty of habitability plays an important role in our understanding of the relationship between tenant and landlord; it helps to define the parameters and requirements of contracts between tenant and the owner. In doing so, the implied warranty of habitability is meant to ensure that a home or rental unit is in a livable condition. In this article, we’ll take a look at what the warranty of habitability is, how it developed, and what differentiates the warranty of habitability from the previous landlord-tenant law. Background of the Implied Warranty of Habitability When someone hears about the warranty of habitability, their first question is usually “what is the implied warranty of habitability?” This is understandable, given that the implied warranty of habitability isn’t exactly well known. Most renters have probably never heard of the implied warranty of habitability, despite the fact that it provides important safeguards for tenant’s rights. In order to gain a better understanding of what the implied warranty of habitability is, it is helpful to understand what state of affairs existed prior to the adoption of an implied warranty of habitability. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara

    Contractor Manslaughter? Safety Shortcuts Are Not Worth It

    August 11, 2011 —

    It’s been a while since I discussed the importance of safety. But, a recent article on ENR.com compelled this brief article. Don’t shortcut safety — you could be facing serious criminal repercussions.

    A New York crane company owner and one of his employees are each facing a second-degree manslaughter charge for the death of two construction workers.  The charges stem from the collapse of a crane in New York City. The district attorney determined that the crane owner cut a few corners to reduce its operation costs, significantly sacrificing safety.

    Another example was the 2010 trial of another New York crane operator who was charged with manslaughter. In that case, the criminal charges failed to stick, but an administrative judge found that the contractor used a damaged sling to support the steel collar binding the tower-crane mast to the 18th floor of a high-rise building being constructed. The company also used four slings instead of the eight, as specified by the crane manufacturer; improperly attached the slings and failed to pad or soften them.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Douglas Reiser of Reiser Legal LLC. Mr. Reiser can be contacted at info@reiserlegal.com

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

    Texas Jury Finds Presence of SARS-CoV-2 Virus Causes “Physical Loss or Damage” to Property, Awards Over $48 Million to Baylor College of Medicine

    September 26, 2022 —
    A Texas jury has found that the presence of SARS-CoV-2 virus on the property of Baylor College of Medicine (BCM) caused “physical loss or damage” and resulting economic loss, triggering coverage under BCM’s commercial property insurance program. The jury awarded BCM over $48 million following a three-day trial; the award consisted of $42.8 million in business interruption, $3.3 million in extra expense, and $2.3 million in damage to research projects. The verdict came after the court denied the insurers’ pre-trial motion for summary judgment, rejecting the insurers’ contention that a virus cannot—as a matter of law—cause physical loss or damage to property. In denying the motion, the court held that whether the presence of the virus causes physical loss or damage presents a question of fact for the jury to resolve; a copy of the order rejecting the insurers’ summary judgment argument can be found here. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Kevin V. Small, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Mr. Small may be contacted at ksmall@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Nicholas A. Thede Joins Ball Janik LLP

    October 02, 2015 —
    As of September 1st, Nicholas A. Thede, an insurance recovery litigator, joined Ball Janik LLP’s Insurance Recovery, Construction Defect, and Litigation practices. According to the release, Mr. Thede “has advised clients in a wide variety of insurance disputes, including claims arising under general liability, professional liability, directors and officers, employee dishonesty, homeowners, and automotive insurance policies. Thede has successfully represented clients in trials, arbitrations, and appeals, and has obtained numerous favorable settlements for his clients. He has handled insurance disputes throughout Oregon and Washington, along with several other jurisdictions. Mr. Thede has substantial experience litigating claims for insurance ‘bad faith’ and recovery of attorney fees in a variety of settings.” Ball Janik LLP is headquartered in Portland, Oregon. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    It’s Time for a Net Zero Building Boom

    May 02, 2022 —
    Is it too much to ask Americans to take their foot off the gas and reset their thermostats? On March 18, the International Energy Agency released a 10-point plan for reducing oil use, arguing that advanced economies can readily cut demand by 2.7 million barrels a day in the next four months, an amount large enough to avoid major supply shortages as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine roils the energy market. The plan’s major prescriptions will look familiar to anyone who recalls the OPEC shocks of the 1970s: reducing speed limits to improve gas mileage, boosting transit use, and discouraging non-essential car and air travel. But its exclusive focus on the transportation sector overlooks the substantial efficiency gains to be had from the built environment: Buildings consume about 40% of the energy used in the U.S. every year. Yet reducing energy use in buildings has been stigmatized by fossil-fuel interests as a lifestyle deprivation — an argument that’s been internalized by pundits and politicians even as geopolitical turmoil drive spikes in oil prices and climate change impacts upend millions of lives. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James S. Russell, Bloomberg

    If You Can’t Dazzle Em’ With Brilliance, Baffle Em’ With BS: Apprentices on Public Works Projects

    October 24, 2023 —
    The “Big Four” when it comes to public works contracting on state and local projects in California are:
    1. Registration with the California Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”);
    2. Payment of prevailing of wages and maintenance and submission of certified payroll;
    3. Compliance with the “skilled and trained workforce” requirements on certain projects; and
    4. Hiring apprentices on state and local public works projects with a value of $30,000 or more.
    The next case, GRFCO, Inc. v. Superior Court, 89 Cal.App.5th 1295 (2023), discusses the last of these requirements. The case also reminded me of W.C. Field’s old saying – “If you can’t dazzle em’ with brilliance, baffle em’ with bullshit” – and which ended with expected results. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    California Supreme Court Holds that Requirement of Prejudice for Late Notice Defense is a Fundamental Public Policy of the State for Choice of Law Analysis

    November 04, 2019 —
    California’s highest court held yesterday in Pitzer College v. Indian Harbor Insurance Co., that the state’s insurance notice-prejudice rule is a “fundamental public policy” for the purpose of choice of law analyses. This unanimous ruling, issued in response to certified questions from the Ninth Circuit, confirms and emphasizes California’s common law rule that policyholders who provide “late notice” may proceed with their insurance claim, absent a showing by the insurer of substantial prejudice. The California Supreme Court also extended the prejudice requirement, holding that a first-party insurer must show that it was prejudiced before denying coverage under a policy’s “consent provision,” which typically provides that the policyholder must obtain the insurer’s “consent” before incurring costs and expenses. Reprinted courtesy of Hunton Andrews Kurth attorneys Lorelie S. Masters, Michael S. Levine and Michelle M. Spatz Ms. Masters may be contacted at lmasters@HuntonAK.com Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Ms. Spatz may be contacted at mspatz@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Legislative Update – The CSLB’s Study Under SB465

    March 22, 2018 —
    Following the tragic Berkeley balcony collapse in 2015, the Legislature enacted California Senate Bill 465 which commissioned the Contractors State License Board (“CSLB” or “Board”) to perform a study regarding the efficacy of having contractors report settlements to the Board. In December 2017 the CSLB released their findings in a report. The ultimate conclusion of the report is to recommend to the Legislature that the ability of the CSLB to protect the public “would be enhanced by regulations requiring licensees to report judgments, arbitration awards, or settlement payments of construction defect claims for rental residential units.” Senator Jerry Hill authored SB465, and his office is presently now drafting legislation on settlement reporting based in part on this study. The most troubling concern about the study is transparency. The report references nine exhibits, all of which have been withheld from publication under purposes of confidentiality. Therefore, much of the CSLB’s study must be taken at face value because much of the data they rely on to formulate their conclusions cannot be independently verified. One of the factors that the CSLB undertook in its study was to determine criteria for when a settlement was “nuisance value,” and therefore less important for reporting purposes. The CSLB acknowledged there was no industry-wide definition for “nuisance value,” whether it be in the insurance industry, construction industry, or otherwise. Insurer survey respondents reached a general consensus on aspects of what can constitute a “nuisance value” settlement, including the amount of the settlement and the size of the case. However, the response rate to the insurer survey was only 3.3 percent. In general, the concern with using settlement amount and size of the case as indicative factors is the fact that a large settlement size, for instance, may still constitute a “nuisance value” settlement. One example would be a large settlement figure in a case involving hundreds of homes in multiple subdivisions. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John Castro, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani LLP
    Mr. Castro may be contacted at jcastro@grsm.com